Opinion
In life, there are several topics traditionally avoided in conversation when gathering with friends, such as politics, religion, and money. Some ideas are best left parked in your head instead of being debated in the open as they can fray long-time friendships or even family. For the bond of Canadian agriculture going forward, the idea of protecting supply-managed industries through legislation has created a wedge among the industry that threatens to harm relationships indefinitely.
I have heard from farmers, farm groups, politicians, and trade specialists and it is pretty easy to conclude this proposed legislation has significantly driven a wedge between industry groups and the farmers they represent. Summarizing discussions with farm groups on all sides of the legislation, a common thread of discussion is, “This is tearing relationships in the industry apart.”
Related: C-282 is a house of sticks and not bricks
Bill C-282 is a Private Member’s Bill that passed in the House and now resides in the Canadian Senate. The bill would prevent future Canadian trade negotiators from giving up market access to the Canadian supply-managed markets. What was initially a “state your support for supply management” on the record in the House has since become a nasty, thorny issue for the Senate to sort out. Meanwhile, the NDP dropped their support of the Trudeau government so the Bloc now has more leverage and C-282 is one of their demands to keep the government afloat (update here on where 282 is as of Nov. 7/24).
C-282 should not be a referendum on whether politicians support supply management or not; you can be for supply management but against C-282 because many supply-managed farmers are. A piece of legislation that pits export-oriented farmers and industry against supply-managed farmers and industry better be worth the pain and agony of destroying relationships. Political and trade experts have told me that as written the bill could be worked around by future governments or trade negotiators. If that is the case, is this all worth it?
One sitting Canadian politician very familiar with agriculture and hearing from both sides of the issue said to me in confidence, “it’s a terrible f****ing piece of legislation.”
At this point C-282 has done more harm than good in tearing apart relationships and our trade partners haven’t even had a chance to use it against us yet. Now, with Donald Trump confirmed as the president-elect for the White House, a full renegotiation of CUSMA/USMCA in July 2026 is all but assured. Knowing what we do about how Trump negotiates, how do you think 282 will be viewed? Canada surely cannot be that naive to think that a flimsy piece of legislation is going to somehow be a shield in a trade negotiation with a president aimed at fixing perceived “trade wrongs.”
The best thing that could happen to C-282 is that it dies on the order paper, so the industry can get to work repairing the harm it has already done.
