Let’s hope everything I’ve read about you will prove true.

But based on past experience, I am somewhat cynical, as I have asked your predecessors to take action on embedding effective farm safety within the elementary curricula… with no success.

I have been active in kids’ farm safety for more than two decades, since doing my master’s degree in 1997 at the University of Alberta (on Safety Awareness in Non-urban Pre-schoolers). During my years as farm safety co-ordinator with the Daysland and District Ag Society, we developed the Mic Safety Mouse kids’ farm safety program, which included five story booklets (plus fact and activity sheets, which can be accessed on the Canadian Agricultural Safety Association website.

After extensive fundraising, a class set of the Mic Safety booklets and the resource package (including puppets) were sent to every rural school division in the province. We also ran full-day pilot projects across Alberta, taking model tractors, the grain-flow wagon and a PTO demo, puppets, books, and puzzles, etc. out to schools and preschools, Hutterite colonies, ag societies, and other events.

It was a major effort to raise safety awareness and to save kids’ lives on Alberta farms.

Our Progressive Ag Safety Day involved up to 60 volunteers at ‘hands-on’ stations demonstrating farm hazards (including protecting your hearing; dangers of flowing grain; dangers of dugouts, electricity, and farm chemicals; safety rules for off-road vehicles and railway crossings, etc.). Using a jelly mould and raw eggs proved to be a very effective way to convince children to wear approved helmets.

Positive feedback was abundant. I recall a mom who lost her son in a PTO incident, but (when the scheduled volunteer phoned in sick) offered to fill in at the PTO-danger demo. The local implement dealer did this demonstration using a dummy getting caught in a PTO. So I quickly offered to relieve that mom, but she said she thought she “could handle it.” She spoke to those Grade 5 kids in a quiet voice, “We are teaching you this, so this won’t happen to you!” That class turned as silent as any chapel, and one brave girl responded while choking back tears, saying, “Thank you for telling us this.”

Farm safety days not only made an impact on the students, but also on their parents. One mother’s response was choosing to buy an off-road vehicle with a rollover bar, and insisting that all riders wear a helmet.

However, holding one safety day every two to five years does not have the lasting effects of a booster shot. Teachers have repeatedly stated that to be truly effective, farm safety education must be embedded within the curricula, so that the safety messages are repeated often.

So for years, I have written every minister of agriculture, education, and health — asking them to make farm safety education part of the elementary health and safety curriculum. Not one has shown any interest.

How many more kids have to die on Alberta farms before one of you will listen and do something meaningful about it? If action had been taken in 2009, maybe some of the 14 children who have died on Alberta farms since then, might be alive today.

The article in this paper said you would “fight for farmers.” Dare I believe you?

So I write to you and make the same plea I’ve made to your predecessors.

Your (promised) fight for farmers must also include Alberta’s farm children. They must be effectively taught how to be safe, and how to make safe decisions. This type of education has an impact — both on the children and their families.

Time and time again we have seen that farmers listen and act when their child or grandchild turns loving eyes on them, and conveys a “Please be safe!” message personally. One youngster at a Northlands safety demonstration turned to his grandpa farmer, and pleaded with him to wear safety goggles, saying, “You have to protect your old eyes too!” That grandfather didn’t hesitate a heartbeat as he donned those goggles and continued the demo with his grandchild.

I read that replacing Bill 6 is a priority for you. But it’s labour legislation that does absolutely nothing to keep anyone safe or prevent injuries/fatalities on the farm. It merely provides compensation “after” the incident.

To be effective, farm safety education must be embedded and implemented in the elementary school curriculum.

What we don’t need is having our political leaders shed tears after another farm kid has died in an accident that effective safety instruction could have prevented.

Regards,
Marion Leithead
Bawlf

The post Opinion: An open letter to Agriculture Minister Devin Dreeshen appeared first on Alberta Farmer Express.

Some might construe the creation of the Regional Advisory Committees (RACs) as proactive, but only until they read Section 5 which allows cabinet or a minister to completely disregard advice/suggestions from the RACs, and gives cabinet or a minister the power to make decisions irrespective of advice given by RACs. So RACs don’t qualify as a “benefit.”

What I found upon re-reading Bill 36 is serious food for thought. Bill 36, Section 11(1) states, “For the purpose of achieving or maintaining an objective or a policy of a regional plan, a regional plan may, by express reference to a statutory consent or type or class of statutory consent, affect, amend, or extinguish the statutory consent or the terms or the conditions of the statutory consent.”

In the definition section, Bill 36 (a), it says, “statutory consent means a permit, licence, registration, approval, authorization, disposition, certificate, allocation, agreement or instrument issued under or authorized by an enactment or regulatory instrument.” A long list indicates what regulatory instrument means, ranging from bylaws, policies, and plans of a local government body to any instrument designated as a regulatory instrument by the Lt. Governor (section 66). Bill 36, Section 17 (4) says, “If there is a conflict or inconsistency between this Act (Bill 36) and any other enactment, this act prevails.” So that negates the rights that we had under the Alberta Bill of Rights.

Surely the Supreme Court of Canada guarantees a right to “due process,” but not in Alberta, according to Bill 36. Section 15 (3) (a) says, “subject to… subsection (1) [above] does not a) create or provide any person with a cause of action or a right or ability to bring an application or proceeding in or before any court or in or before any decision-maker.” Section 15 (3) b) [does not] create any claim exercisable by any person” and (Section 15 (3) (c) [does not] confer jurisdiction on any court or decision-maker to grant relief in respect of any claim.”

Furthermore, (just in case we can’t understand that) Section15 (4) says “For the purposes of subsection (3), a claim includes any right, application, proceeding or request to a court for relief of any nature whatsoever, without limitation. The Supreme Court of Canada says I have a right to “due process,” butnot in Alberta,according to Bill 36.

Bill 36 (Section 15) says the regional plan “binds a) the Crown, b) local government bodies, c) decision-makers, d) all other persons.” Isn’t that just about everybody regardless of previous legislation?

There is an overlap or interconnection with Bills 19 and 50, which tends to reinforce the absolute centralization of control and power. Bill 50 removes our right to a “hearing” before the Alberta Utilities Board (AUB), and Bill 19, Section 17 (1 a) and b) says,ifaccording to Cabinet’s or a minister’s opinion, a landowner breaks a “restriction” and they consider it to be a violation, the landowner can be fined $100,000 or spend two years in jail… or both).

Bill 19, Section 16 (1)says, “Where, on the application of the Minister, it appears to the Court of Queen’s Bench that a person has done, is doing, or is about to do any act or thing constituting or directed toward the commission of an offence under this Act, the court may issue an injunction ordering any person named in the application.” In other words, a landowner can suffer fines or imprisonment for what Cabinet or a minister perceives to be the landowners’ intentions.

I have just highlighted a few of the ways in which these Bills violate our rights. For these (and many more) reasons, there is not anything worth salvaging in these three bills.

The post Reader Finds Too Many Overriding Provisions In Land-Use Bills appeared first on Alberta Farmer Express.