Farmland ownership up for debate

[jdobbin]

http://www.canada.com/reginaleaderpost/new...a4-c8f9a59c7c3a

Rules that limit foreign ownership of Saskatchewan farmland to 10 acres may be due for review, Agriculture Minister Bob Bjornerud says.

The minister said the case of an American man who is fighting an order to sell Saskatchewan land owned by his family for nearly 100 years has highlighted some issues with the current law.

Even though the province's Farm Land Security Board already has the power to grant exemptions to the 10-acre foreign ownership limit, legislative changes are also an option the Sask. Party government could consider, Bjornerud said Wednesday.

The Saskatchewan government has been trying to get this guy to sell so they can develop the farm for oil.

It seems strange that the two of the very most conservative governments in Canada restrict farmland sales. It is uncompetitive. U.S. farmers are now opening huge farms in large swaths of Brazil and Russia that have not seen production in years or were not capable of doing the work or making the investment.

Edited August 21, 2008 by jdobbin

[blueblood]

http://www.canada.com/reginaleaderpost/new...a4-c8f9a59c7c3a

The Saskatchewan government has been trying to get this guy to sell so they can develop the farm for oil.

It seems strange that the two of the very most conservative governments in Canada restrict farmland sales. It is uncompetitive. U.S. farmers are now opening huge farms in large swaths of Brazil and Russia that have not seen production in years or were not capable of doing the work or making the investment.

There's lots of Canadian Farmers looking for land, rent is up to 50 bucks an acre. It makes perfect sense to have this kind of restriction because it is better for our economy and gov't coffers if the land stays Canadian owned. There isn't that kind of shortage of people yet.

The U.S. plays a game similar to this concerning other things such as import restrictions on various commodities.

The U.S. farmers are playing a dangerous game having big farms in Russia considering how Russia handles it's foreign investers.

[jdobbin]

There's lots of Canadian Farmers looking for land, rent is up to 50 bucks an acre. It makes perfect sense to have this kind of restriction because it is better for our economy and gov't coffers if the land stays Canadian owned. There isn't that kind of shortage of people yet.

Citation for the claim that is better for the economy to have restrictions?

The U.S. plays a game similar to this concerning other things such as import restrictions on various commodities.

The U.S. farmers are playing a dangerous game having big farms in Russia considering how Russia handles it's foreign investers.

And in Brazil. Some dangerous game. They are turning into multimillionaires and proving that you can run a farm as a business on an international scale.

If some people are conservatives, they will remove these onerous restrictions on land ownership.

[Topaz]

Well at least they are not buying for the purpose of spreading their pig manure on it and then it makes it way into the Great Lakes! We have farmer's around here that do and then people wonder why the lakes are so polluted.

[blueblood]

Citation for the claim that is better for the economy to have restrictions?

And in Brazil. Some dangerous game. They are turning into multimillionaires and proving that you can run a farm as a business on an international scale.

If some people are conservatives, they will remove these onerous restrictions on land ownership.

In russia the dangerous part is expropriation by their gov't, it has happened in the oil industry.

European countries get to ban GMO's from Canada and the Americans jack the tariffs up on certain ag imports. Tit for tat. This is also helping Canadian farmers get a foothold in purchasing land and helping become rich themselves. The American farmers have a large headstart as far as setting up farms go. A few prairie farms are 100 years old or older. It helps when a person has "old money" to go on investing adventures. Canadian farms are productive enough if not more so. Remember that the larger a farm gets, the more it loses productivity, this happened in commie russia. There is a certain size that is optimal. If Canadian farmers were still going with an ox and plow, I'd agree with you, but there's a point where there has to be some regulations.

That land is going to make x dollars an acre no matter who owns it. I'd rather the money stay in Canada.

[blueblood]

Well at least they are not buying for the purpose of spreading their pig manure on it and then it makes it way into the Great Lakes! We have farmer's around here that do and then people wonder why the lakes are so polluted.

And the millions of people living in Toronto all using the washrooms don't contribute either?

Spreading pig manure makes the soil more fertile and is cheaper than buying fertilizer. But according to you people can starve and less fuel can be made just as long your happy.

Too bad the prairies don't drain into the great lakes.

[jdobbin]

In russia the dangerous part is expropriation by their gov't, it has happened in the oil industry.

Well, since most of the U.S. farmers seem to be in Ukraine, they are probably okay.

European countries get to ban GMO's from Canada and the Americans jack the tariffs up on certain ag imports. Tit for tat. This is also helping Canadian farmers get a foothold in purchasing land and helping become rich themselves. The American farmers have a large headstart as far as setting up farms go. A few prairie farms are 100 years old or older. It helps when a person has "old money" to go on investing adventures. Canadian farms are productive enough if not more so. Remember that the larger a farm gets, the more it loses productivity, this happened in commie russia. There is a certain size that is optimal. If Canadian farmers were still going with an ox and plow, I'd agree with you, but there's a point where there has to be some regulations.

That land is going to make x dollars an acre no matter who owns it. I'd rather the money stay in Canada.

I'm afraid that the protectionism you describe for farmers in Canada sound like the communism you scorn.

[blueblood]

Well, since most of the U.S. farmers seem to be in Ukraine, they are probably okay.

I'm afraid that the protectionism you describe for farmers in Canada sound like the communism you scorn.

Every Capitalist gov't in the world has some sort of rules that it believes work in the country's financial self interest. Canada has this so country people won't be in the poorhouse and income tax from farming operations go to the Canadian gov't instead of somewhere else. That being said, if farmers in Canada were on the same tech level as farmers in Africa, I would agree with you. However Canadian farmers aren't.

There are other industries in Canada and the World that have protectionism in one form or another. Take the medical field for example. The CMA has that sewn up tight.

[jdobbin]

Every Capitalist gov't in the world has some sort of rules that it believes work in the country's financial self interest. Canada has this so country people won't be in the poorhouse and income tax from farming operations go to the Canadian gov't instead of somewhere else. That being said, if farmers in Canada were on the same tech level as farmers in Africa, I would agree with you. However Canadian farmers aren't.

This is the socialist that you scorn for everyone else.

There are other industries in Canada and the World that have protectionism in one form or another. Take the medical field for example. The CMA has that sewn up tight.

I have no idea what you are talking about.

[blueblood]

This is the socialist that you scorn for everyone else.

I have no idea what you are talking about.

That's a matter of opinion, I believe that there is nothing wrong wih gov't investing in industries that will eventually turn profits and pay the gov't back in taxes. I don't call that socialism, that's investment. It's also a matter of national security, it is in our best interest to have Canadians control our own food and fuel supply or we'd be in a mess like the Pakastanis and Americans. There's ways to get around that, there's some farmers from Europe immigrating to Canada to set up shop.

As for the CMA, why is it there are only 100 grads from med school? There are plenty of smart enough kids at university, why is med school such an old boys club? Then theres the CRTC and their policies. The thing seperating keeping farmland Canadian owned from this is that the farmland being Canadian owned doesn't hurt anybody. It's attitudes like that is why the Liberals don't succeed in western canada.

[jdobbin]

That's a matter of opinion, I believe that there is nothing wrong wih gov't investing in industries that will eventually turn profits and pay the gov't back in taxes. I don't call that socialism, that's investment. It's also a matter of national security, it is in our best interest to have Canadians control our own food and fuel supply or we'd be in a mess like the Pakastanis and Americans. There's ways to get around that, there's some farmers from Europe immigrating to Canada to set up shop.

I think real conservatives call it picking and choosing and that is socialism.

As for the CMA, why is it there are only 100 grads from med school? There are plenty of smart enough kids at university, why is med school such an old boys club? Then theres the CRTC and their policies. The thing seperating keeping farmland Canadian owned from this is that the farmland being Canadian owned doesn't hurt anybody. It's attitudes like that is why the Liberals don't succeed in western canada.

The CMA doesn't control how many students are admitted to Med school.

It's attitude of some rural people who support Tories who keep them from winning urban areas.

[blueblood]

I think real conservatives call it picking and choosing and that is socialism.

The CMA doesn't control how many students are admitted to Med school.

It's attitude of some rural people who support Tories who keep them from winning urban areas.

I see nothing wrong with the government investing money in enterprises that will boost the economy and will eventually get paid back and then some in taxes collected. It's just good business. I do have a problem with taxing the crap out of businesses and seeing the money sent to areas where it won't grow.

As for the land, it's national security and fiscal responsibility. Look at it this way, two equally able people are wanting the land, who is the gov't going to want to use it, the one who pays income tax or the one who doesn't??? If both are equally able to grow a good crop, why sell out when we can strengthen our own producers so they can compete better on the world stage? This program does not cost you a dime, and is better for the Canadian economy.

Your also a huge picker and chooser when it comes to what you like to see the gov't spend money on and do, we all are.

My mistake, the Universities then.

[jdobbin]

I see nothing wrong with the government investing money in enterprises that will boost the economy and will eventually get paid back and then some in taxes collected. It's just good business. I do have a problem with taxing the crap out of businesses and seeing the money sent to areas where it won't grow.

Where do you think the government gets money to invest in business? It is by taxing people. For ethanol, the costs added to people's personal taxes and inflation doesn't help at the individual level.

As for the land, it's national security and fiscal responsibility. Look at it this way, two equally able people are wanting the land, who is the gov't going to want to use it, the one who pays income tax or the one who doesn't??? If both are equally able to grow a good crop, why sell out when we can strengthen our own producers so they can compete better on the world stage? This program does not cost you a dime, and is better for the Canadian economy.

Ah yes, I figured we would hear about the national security issue.

This is a protectionist policy for each province. It forbids out of province people as well as foreigners from buying land. Are you suggesting it is a provincial security issue to prevent someone from Ontario to buy a large amount of land in Saskatchewan for farming?

Your also a huge picker and chooser when it comes to what you like to see the gov't spend money on and do, we all are.

I'm just saying that you say you are a true blue Conservative who supports socialism.

My mistake, the Universities then.

Well, not quite. Blame the Filmon Tories for limiting the amount of doctors. They thought it would save money in the 1990s.

[blueblood]

Where do you think the government gets money to invest in business? It is by taxing people. For ethanol, the costs added to people's personal taxes and inflation doesn't help at the individual level.

Ah yes, I figured we would hear about the national security issue.

This is a protectionist policy for each province. It forbids out of province people as well as foreigners from buying land. Are you suggesting it is a provincial security issue to prevent someone from Ontario to buy a large amount of land in Saskatchewan for farming?

I'm just saying that you say you are a true blue Conservative who supports socialism.

Well, not quite. Blame the Filmon Tories for limiting the amount of doctors. They thought it would save money in the 1990s.

Those business's in turn pay tax and at times more tax than the average person, so it balances out in the end.

I was actually able to buy land in saskatchewan, I didn't because moving machinery and trucking would be a nightmare. Now I'm kicking myself because of it. 4 quarters corner to corner and flat to boot, I'm really kicking myself. That being said I don't agree with the part of the law about fellow Canadians wanting to snap up land. Like I said for security reasons it's best for the food and fuel supply to be Canadian controlled. There's also hunting enthusiasts from Alberta who bought some of my old cattle pasture as a private hunting spot. At the provincial level it doesn't matter as property taxes get paid to the province no matter who owns it. The federal income tax is another story. That line of reasoning of mine only works if a Canadian and a Foreigner are on equal ground to exploit the land, naturally priority should be given to the Canadian. If the foreigner is better (which in Agriculture the Canadian is equal or better) then open it up, such as the Alberta oil patch.

I'm saying I'm a centrist the same as you are, the tories aren't republicans you know just like the liberals aren't communists.

[fellowtraveller]

http://www.canada.com/reginaleaderpost/new...a4-c8f9a59c7c3a

The Saskatchewan government has been trying to get this guy to sell so they can develop the farm for oil.

It seems strange that the two of the very most conservative governments in Canada restrict farmland sales. It is uncompetitive. U.S. farmers are now opening huge farms in large swaths of Brazil and Russia that have not seen production in years or were not capable of doing the work or making the investment.

Nonsensical premise. As usual.

The govt does not operate any drilling rigs.

The government has absolutely no need to own the land for it to be developed for oil, thousands of landowners currently earn revenue from companies drilling, building pipelines, installing compressor stations, etc etc etc. on their privately owned land.

[jdobbin]

Nonsensical premise. As usual.

The govt does not operate any drilling rigs.

The government has absolutely no need to own the land for it to be developed for oil, thousands of landowners currently earn revenue from companies drilling, building pipelines, installing compressor stations, etc etc etc. on their privately owned land.

Perhaps you should read what local papers were writing. The out of province owner didn't want to have oil rigs on his property whereas many people in the region thought and knew it would be lucrative. They lobbied the government to force the owner to sell using the provisions of the act forbidding out of province ownership.

A number of private buyers were interested in the land and the Saskatchewan government was interested in the royalties.

As the case went public, it looked like the government was trying to bully a family that had owned the land for a hundred years. Public support rose and the government backed down.

Edited September 2, 2008 by jdobbin

[blueblood]

Perhaps you should read what local papers were writing. The out of province owner didn't want to have oil rigs on his property whereas many people in the region thought and knew it would be lucrative. They lobbied the government to force the owner to sell using the provisions of the act forbidding out of province ownership.

A number of private buyers were interested in the land and the Saskatchewan government was interested in the royalties.

As the case went public, it looked like the government was trying to bully a family that had owned the land for a hundred years. Public support rose and the government backed down.

Yes in a recent ruling the guy did get to keep his farm. The sask gov't has allowed a few exceptions, emphasis on few.

What's worse is the family from St. Lazare that got the screws put to them by the provincial and municipal gov'ts.

Edited September 3, 2008 by blueblood

[jdobbin]

Yes in a recent ruling the guy did get to keep his farm. The sask gov't has allowed a few exceptions, emphasis on few.

They were totally embarrassed at the attempt to drive a family off land they have owned for a hundred years so that greedy neighbors could buy it and bring in the oil rigs.

[blueblood]

They were totally embarrassed at the attempt to drive a family off land they have owned for a hundred years so that greedy neighbors could buy it and bring in the oil rigs.

Had it been Cargill that was in that family's shoes, the gov't would have looked like heroes. Picking on the little guy does not look good, even though I agree with the gov't that only Canadians should own Canadian farms. The oil rigs are about 5 acres a piece and only allowed 4 to a quarter, the neighbour would have also got some good land and a yardsite on top of it.

[tango]

I'm saying I'm a centrist the same as you are, the tories aren't republicans you know just like the liberals aren't communists.

You sure make a lot of sense.

Thanks for brightening my day!