In addition to fundamental public policy precepts stating that specific policies ought not
\nto contradict one another, there is something singularly perverse about giving false hope
\nand setting an industry up to fail. Based on the assistance package, some people who
\nhave been losing money in the pork sector may feel comforted, and they (along with
\nlenders and investors) may even begin to reinvest in the pork segment. But when the
\nnatural comparative advantage is being structurally eroded by policy backing ethanol
\nmandates and subsidies to make ethanol from grain, the investments in pork will later
\nprove less profitable, magnifying existing losses and probably driving a demand for
\nfuture public assistance.
\nThe ramification is that by simultaneously assisting the pork segment to recover and
\nunderwriting grain-based ethanol production with subsidy and mandates, governments
\nare paving the way for future losses in pork and increased industry support measures in
\nthe future. Consistency would demand that pork (and beef) policy and bio-fuel policy be
\ncoordinated; to do otherwise is disingenuous to pork and beef producers and a waste of
\npublic money. A means of recognition and implementation of this is to stop further
\nfunding of new grain-based ethanol development in consideration of the pork strategy,
\nand for that which can be anticipated in beef.
\nThe notion of opening the throttle and applying the brakes at the same time is that
\nsomething must give, eventually. Simultaneously assisting the pork and beef segments
\non one hand, and legislating and subsidizing grain-based ethanol on the other puts
\npolicies at odds with themselves. Beyond the insincere treatment of hog producers and
\nthe future demand for public support created, the Canadian manufacturing sector is not in
\na position to tolerate the fallout in food manufacturing that will be created. The
\nrecognition of these dichotomies appears not to have reached senior political levels.
\nThe Canadian pork segment is grappling with a range of factors outside Canadian control
\n\u2013 exchange rates, burgeoning red meat supply, H1N1, etc. The CPC strategy anticipates
\nmuch of this, and presents a cohesive approach that warrants public support. There are
\nothers for which Canadian governments bear direct responsibility. The CPC strategy
\nmakes reference to the enormous problems created by US COOL, which was allowed to
\noccur on the foreign affairs watch of the federal government. The CPC strategy does not
\nacknowledge the detrimental impact of Canadian ethanol policy; nevertheless, it has
\nseriously weakened the competiveness of hog production. These failings, among the
\nseveral challenges facing Canadian pork and beef, fall within the control of Canadian
\npolicy makers, and the pork segment is justified in requesting compensation for them.
\nMoreover, disconnected policies relating to bio-fuels and trade must be resolved with the
\nred meat strategy if a cost-competitive Canadian pork segment is to reemerge as
\nenvisioned.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
In addition to fundamental public policy precepts stating that specific policies ought not to contradict one another, there is something singularly perverse about giving false hope and setting an industry up to fail. Based on the assistance package, some people who have been losing money in the pork sector may feel comforted, and they (along […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[7],"tags":[8882,10871,13816,2392,18311,3814,6784,190,231,19644,23694,286,11573,6904,20007,7658,14804,34,3878,13370,9053,7735,7736,13330,94,10859,14784,3465,13564,16262,2662,1324,7737,17743,27282,20912,20911,4874,52,17525,20757,766],"class_list":["post-5746","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-economics","tag-al","tag-apply","tag-ass","tag-business","tag-canadian-pork","tag-competitive","tag-cos","tag-cost","tag-cover","tag-dd","tag-dir","tag-dust","tag-feder","tag-fee","tag-gh","tag-government-support","tag-hal","tag-hog","tag-hog-production","tag-ken","tag-leg","tag-lending","tag-loans","tag-lou","tag-meat","tag-nat","tag-ness","tag-pea","tag-people","tag-pl","tag-policies","tag-pork","tag-pork-bailout-2009","tag-prod","tag-production","tag-some","tag-t","tag-tan","tag-treatment","tag-tumors-boone-iowa-high-concentration-environmental","tag-vision","tag-waste"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"http:\/\/prairieswine.com\/rsc\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/5746","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"http:\/\/prairieswine.com\/rsc\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"http:\/\/prairieswine.com\/rsc\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/prairieswine.com\/rsc\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/prairieswine.com\/rsc\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=5746"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"http:\/\/prairieswine.com\/rsc\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/5746\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"http:\/\/prairieswine.com\/rsc\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=5746"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/prairieswine.com\/rsc\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=5746"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/prairieswine.com\/rsc\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=5746"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}