Dear Minister,
I write today to bring to your attention concerns which have been raised in my riding of BC Southern Interior with respect to BC Assessment’s farm land classification system. It is my understanding that as a result of recommendations which were included in a 2008 report prepared by the Farm Assessment Review Panel (FARP) the regulations regarding farm classification are in the process of being changed.
The concern I have is that some farmers are having their farm status revoked and as a result are faced with increases in property tax which were not planned for. This is happening in some cases to long-standing farm operations that have not changed their practices in years. Losing farm status for even one year, given all the other challenges farmers face when trying to turn a profit, is a discouragement that is not so easily overcome.
There are an increasing number of factors coming together which indicate that we must take a new policy approach if we are to ensure an uninterrupted and affordable food supply for Canadians into the future. Spikes in energy prices, climate change calamities, global economic downturns, rising income inequality are just some of the events that are having a profound impact on the ability of Canadians to enjoy food security. The public is highly motivated to support local food production as a means of reducing our vulnerability to outside forces beyond our control. The principles of Food Sovereignty are capturing the imagination of people all around the world who have had enough of the industrialized, export driven food system that is leaving too many people hungry. It would seem obvious that a great deal of care must be taken to ensure that new or existing government policies do not have the impact of discouraging anyone that is willing to make an effort to contribute to a local food supply from doing so.
It is my belief that greater attention must be paid to all of the mitigating factors which may be at play when assessing income thresholds for the purposes of changing someone’s farm status.
For instance, it is difficult for farmers to make a full time living from small-scale farming alone leaving many to seek off-farm jobs to supplement their incomes. In fact, this is often true for large and medium scale farmers as well. Off farm labour has the effect of curtailing both the amount of acreage that can be managed and the amount that farm will ultimately earn. We cannot ignore the fact that farmers are price takers, not price makers, and often, through no fault of their own, are unable to even earn back their cost of production.
Cheap produce is being allowed to flood our markets at harvest time from those countries who, unlike Canada, heavily subsidize their farmers. There is a reason BC farmers are ripping out their apple orchards and moving to grapes to get into the wine business - they simply cannot compete with apples coming in from China and the U.S. that undercut the prices they get.
In reviewing the Farm Assessment Review Panel report I was concerned by one element of the stated mandate which was to focus on a property assessment system which, among other things, “enhances competitiveness”.
In 2009/10, the federal Standing Committee on Agriculture and Agri-Food conducted a study and prepared a report called Competitiveness in Canadian Agriculture. One of the invited witnesses from the National Farmers Union urged the committee to make a careful distinction between the term “competitiveness” and the term “competition”;
“Competition and competitiveness are not similar; in practice, they are more rightly understood as opposites or, at least, as trade-offs. Many of the problems created by Canadian agricultural and food policies can be traced to senior public servants misunderstanding the fundamental differences between competitiveness and competition; the former (roughly synonymous with power, bigness, and growth) is enhanced by mergers, corporate takeovers, and the reduction in the numbers of players; the latter, “competition”, is undermined by these same developments.”
Being competitive also implies attracting a greater market share once the competition has been eliminated. However, alarming Statistics Canada evidence brought to the Committee’s attention showed that despite dramatic increases in market access (Gross Farm Revenues), Canadian farmers had only been able to capture a net of $3 billion of the $802 billion worth of farmers’ products sold into the marketplace since 1985! It was globally dominant agribusiness corporations who were able to capture the other $799 billion. I trust you will agree that these are shocking numbers. The point I am making is that if BC Assessment is using competitiveness and farm income as main criteria, without fully assessing the market forces, it could easily result in farmers unjustly losing their farm status.
If the province is truly sincere about ensuring a “...healthy future for British Columbian families and communities,” as described in FARP’s mandate then, in light of these statistics, I believe serious consideration should be given to actually lowering the current $2,500 income threshold and not have it be increased to $3,500 as has been recommended. Perhaps the income minimums could even be lifted to fall in line with other provinces such as Alberta, Saskatchewan, Manitoba, Newfoundland and also the Yukon.
There is also a view among some of my constituents who own small acreages within the Agricultural Land Reserve that the province’s reluctance to assess all of these properties as agricultural land amounts to a cash grab that will eventually see overwhelming pressure brought to bear to remove the lands from the reserve – because of a lack of incentive for the property owner to do anything else with the land.
To say that the ALR is there to prevent such a thing from happening may be true in theory, but not in practice, as there are many instances of non-farm development occurring on ALR land where the intention was to “build it first and ask forgiveness later” – examples being such things as accommodation for farm workers that houses renters on a 365 days per year basis, and non compliant commercial and industrial operations.
With only four per cent of land in B.C. that is suitable for agriculture purposes it is my belief that every effort must be made to create a tax and regulatory climate in which anyone with an interest in producing food for his or her community is never penalized, but instead given every available advantage to do so.
I would respectfully ask that the files of those whose farm status has been revoked as a result of failing to meet income thresholds are reassessed and a way found to get them back on track without having to pay a tax penalty.
In closing, I would also like to take the opportunity to congratulate you on your recent appointment as Minister of Agriculture for our province. I very much look forward to working with you to further the interests of B.C. food producers and to ensuring long-term food security for all British Columbians.
Thank you for your careful consideration of the aforementioned concerns I have outlined.
Sincerely,
Alex Atamanenko, MP