In a March 30 news release, crop insurer Agriculture Financial Services Corporation (AFSC) reported it was republishing AgriStability cattle prices for animals over 900 pounds for the 2024 and 2025 program years.

WHY IT MATTERS: Producers who received AgriStability benefits for heavy weight cattle in 2024 may now face unexpected repayment demands due to a pricing model error outside their control.

AFSC adopted a new model in 2024 to determine cattle prices for the AgriStability program due to “increasing difficulty” accessing cattle pricing data.

As a result, it priced heavy weight cattle based on a different weight assumption than the one used to establish historical prices.

“Inventory valuations did not accurately reflect market realities, leading to inappropriate AgriStability program benefits being issued to clients for the 2024 program year,” read the release.

Once AFSC discovered the inconsistency, it recalculated heavy weight cattle prices for 2024, including a reassessment of files featuring heavy weight cattle.

“The recalculation determined that certain clients had received benefits to which they were not entitled.”

The insurer says it has contacted affected clients to discuss the reassessment of their files.

“We are committed to supporting these producers by offering flexible repayment arrangements, including interest relief where appropriate, to help manage any impact.”

A review of all market prices found the pricing disparity was limited to animal weights over 900 pounds.

“Going forward, AFSC has added additional oversight to the cattle pricing process to monitor and review unusual price movements and ensure greater accuracy.”

AFSC is asking clients with questions or concerns to contact their preferred branch offices, call its client care centre at 1-877-899-2372 or use live chat on AFSC Connect or afsc.ca.

The post Alberta producers must repay AgriStability benefits after cattle pricing error appeared first on Alberta Farmer Express.

Rising livestock receipts more than compensated for a decline in crop receipts as well as a drop in direct payments.

Every province saw an overall increase, except Saskatchewan, where the crop sector is much larger than livestock.

Total farm cash receipts in Canada were $101 billion last year, up from $98 billion in 2024. However, crop receipts declined from $52 billion to $51 billion, the lowest level in five years.

Livestock surges from $30B to $45B in four years

Total livestock receipts more than made up the difference, going from about $40 billion to $45 billion. In 2021, livestock receipts totalled only $30 billion and have been rising each year since, fueled largely by rising cattle prices.

The other aspect of farm cash receipts is direct payments from governments and various private insurance programs. Those have been declining.

Total direct payments in 2022 were $7.3 billion, with crop insurance being the largest source. With better crops and fewer claims, total direct payments in 2025 were down to $4.8 billion.

Crop insurance payments drop with better harvests

While crop insurance is the largest portion of direct payments, the numbers are a bit deceiving unless you consider the premiums producers pay into the program.

In Saskatchewan for 2025, the StatCan numbers show roughly $725 million in gross crop insurance payments. However, producer premiums were about $469 million. Therefore, net crop insurance payments were $255 million.

That’s down substantially from 2024 when net crop insurance payments in Saskatchewan were $886 million.

Calendar year payments won’t exactly align with growing seasons because some payments are carried beyond the end of the year. However, Saskatchewan had a lot better crop in 2025, with most claims restricted to the southwestern corner of the province.

Alberta did not fare as well. Crop insurance net payments in 2024 were $868 million, while 2025 still hit $615 million.

Net crop insurance payments in Manitoba were $66 million in 2024 and $42 million in 2025.

AgriStability payments nearly double to $905M

AgriStability payments, on the other hand, have been rising, going from $399 million in 2023 to $601 million in 2024 and $905 million last year. Long criticized as ineffectual, more financial advisers now promote the program.

The recent change to allow pasture-related feed costs as an eligible expense should make the program more relevant for livestock producers. As well, improving returns for cow-calf producers should translate into better reference margins in the event of a future downturn.

Payments from AgriInvest accounted for $305 million last year, with $38 million paid in Manitoba, $67 million in Alberta and $99 million in Saskatchewan.

Critics question AgriInvest’s value as research funding shrinks

Since government support is based on one per cent of eligible net sales, total government contributions don’t change drastically from one year to the next.

An increasing number of academics and industry observers are questioning whether the money spent on AgriInvest could be better deployed elsewhere. It’s really a government subsidy of up to $10,000 per farm whether it made money that year or it didn’t.

The forerunner to AgriInvest was the Net Income Stabilization Account, established with somewhat different trigger mechanisms in the early 1990s.

Free money with few strings attached is always popular, but is this the best use of government resources?

Public plant breeding is in jeopardy due to the large government funding cuts to research at Agriculture Canada.

Investment in plant breeding would pay greater dividends to the crop sector than the paltry interest rates achieved on the money accumulating in AgriInvest accounts.

The post Livestock receipts drive farm cash to $101B despite crop decline appeared first on Alberta Farmer Express.

Federal agriculture minister Heath MacDonald announced Feb. 25 the change would be implemented for the 2026 program year. Ministers had committed to this change at their meeting in July.

Livestock producers had asked for this to make the program more attractive to that sector.

WHY IT MATTERS: The costs related to feeding grazing animals on rented pasture were not allowable and producers argued they should be.

The federal government said this would provide more equitable support for cow-calf, sheep and goat producers.

MacDonald said the government is committed to effective, responsive programs for all producers.

The post Feed costs on rented pasture now eligible for AgriStability appeared first on Alberta Farmer Express.

• The budget includes about $1 trillion in investment and posts a deficit over $78 billion.
• The government set a goal of doubling non-U.S. exports over 10 years.
• The federal government proposes to increase the AgriStability compensation rate to 90 per cent from 80 per cent and the payment cap per farm to $6 million from $3 million.
• The Advance Payments Program for canola will see $97.5 million spent over two years to increase the interest-free limit on advances to $500,000 for the 2025 and 2026 program years.
• Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada will wind down, streamline or realign some of its research to better fit government priorities. Agricultural Climate Solution Living Labs will be phased out.

The 2025 federal budget puts a hefty focus on trade diversification along with pledged investments into biofuel production and increased business risk management supports.

The “Canada Strong” budget is touted as a “plan to transform our economy from one that is reliant on a single trade partner, to one that is stronger, more self-sufficient, and more resilient to global shocks” in a federal news release.

It boasts some $1 trillion of investments. It also posts a $78.3 billion deficit.

Investments in transport and trade diversification

The Carney government pledged several efforts to guide Canadian exports, including agri-food, away from overreliance on the American market.

“Canada’s trade remains heavily concentrated with a single partner: the United States,” the budget document says. “At the same time, Canada has significant untapped potential to diversify its trade.”

The budget sets a goal to double non-U.S. exports over 10 years. It says this will generate $300 billion more in trade.

This goal includes a new strategic exports office at Global Affairs Canada, which aims to pave the way for Canadian companies and international business opportunities.

The Asia-Pacific region will be an area of particular focus for Canadian exports going forward, which the budget identifies as a “critical market for Canadian agriculture.”

The government pledged $5 billion over seven years toward a trade diversification corridors fund through Transport Canada, beginning in 2025-26.

It also promised an additional $68.5 million over four years to enhance CanExport, which encourages small and medium-sized businesses to find markets abroad by sharing the costs of international business development activities like legal expenses and market research.

Aside from Asia, the budget also promises new trade efforts in the European market, including $8 million over four years to Global Affairs Canada to deepen trade relationships with European partners, beginning in 2026-27. This same period will also see $20 million to enhance the agency’s capacity to negotiate and implement trade investment-related agreements.

Despite challenges from export markets, the budget notes Canada’s domestic-facing sectors have been faring well. It gives credit to Canadians intentionally redirecting spending to domestic industries.

Direct investments in agriculture programs

The budget promises to help Canada’s agriculture sector to “adapt and respond to economic challenges and a shifting trade environment, while positioning them to take advantage of new opportunities.”

One major investment is in the AgriStability program, where the compensation rate will be increased from 80 per cent to 90 per cent and the payment cap per farm raised from $3 million to $6 million. The government will also work to will identify barriers underrepresented groups face in accessing farm financing.

The Advance Payments Program for canola will see $97.5 million spent over two years to increase the interest-free limit on advances to $500,000 for the 2025 and 2026 program years. In September, the federal government announced it would temporarily increase the interest-free portion to $500,000 from $250,000 to help farmers facing market disruptions due to Chinese tariffs on canola.

The AgriMarketing program has $75 million earmarked to enhance diversification and promotion into new markets over five years, starting in 2026-27.

The biofuel sector will be another recipient of government investment. In a move telegraphed earlier this year, $372 million over two years will go to a Biofuels Production Incentive to support domestic biofuels producers beginning in 2026. This repurposes $175.2 million from the Clean Fuels Fund.

The government also said it intends to amend the Clean Fuel Regulations to support the domestic biofuels industry.

Changes within government bodies

Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada (AAFC) and the Canadian Food Inspection Agency (CFIA) are set to see changes and streamlining.

AAFC will reorient programming, research and expenditures to better align with the government’s overall priorities. This will include phasing out programs outside the core mandate like the Agricultural Climate Solution Living Labs and reducing scientific activities where a “more streamlined approach can be taken.”

The budget proposes several measures withing CFIA to support increased food exports, including modernized trade tools to simplify processes and reduce the risk of errors and product safety concerns overseas.

CFIA will also receive $32.8 million over four years, beginning in 2026-27, to “secure, expand and restore market access for Canadian agriculture and agri-food, fish and seafood sectors,” including looking to other countries for new trade agreements and better market access.

Other investments and projects

The budget included several other projects and legislative changes which could support the agriculture sector. They include:

• An amendment to the Farm Credit Canada act which would require regular legislative reviews to ensure alignment with the needs of the agriculture and agri-food sector.
• “Winding down mechanisms to return direct fuel charge proceeds to Canadians, small- and medium-sized businesses, farmers, and Indigenous governments,” following the cancellation of consumer carbon pricing.
• Nation-building projects to expand trade corridors, including upgrades the Port of Churchill.
• Consideration to invest in projects like ports in Quebec, rail lines in Alberta and rail infrastructure on the West Coast.
• A proposed extension of the 2005 agricultural cooperative tax rules to apply in respect of eligible shares issued before the end of 2030.
• The Contrecoeur Terminal Container Project, which will expand the Port of Montreal’s capacity by approximately 60 per cent to boost Eastern Canada’s trading infrastructure, to be completed in the first round of major nation-building projects.

The post Budget 2025 includes trade focus, boost for agriculture risk management appeared first on Alberta Farmer Express.

Following a meeting of federal, provincial and territorial governments last week, Agriculture Canada announced the compensation rate would increase from 80 to 90 per cent, the compensation cap would be doubled from $3 million to $6 million and interest-free payments to farmers would be advanced for up to 75 per cent of their expected final claim.

The changes are a result of increased strains on producers such as international trade concerns and extreme weather damages from flooding and wildfires, according to the federal government.

Agriculture minister Heath MacDonald said the federal and provincial governments “agreed to make changes to AgriStability so that producers facing trade uncertainty and dry conditions have more protection” after last week’s meeting.

“The improvements take into account the practical considerations that producers must apply to their operations as they respond to market and environmental challenges,” B.C. Agriculture Council president Jennifer Woike said.

The AgriStability program is meant to protect Canadian farmers from large drops in income from external factors. Farmers in B.C. have until July 31, to enrol for the 2025 program year.

The post B.C. farmers to receive increased AgriStability supports appeared first on Alberta Farmer Express.

The federal government proposed several months ago to increase the compensation rate from 80 to 90 per cent and double the maximum payment from $3 million to $6 million. However, provinces have to agree in order for the changes to occur.

Federal minister Heath MacDonald said after a July 17 virtual meeting ministers were “receptive” to this plan and agreed to take the steps required to make the changes. Under the federal-provincial agreement, changes to AgriStability can only be made if two-thirds of provinces agree.

The changes are meant to help with trade challenges Canadian farmers are currently facing, particularly from China and the United States.

Beginning in the 2026 program year, provinces will be able to use a new inventory valuation method for inventory used on farm, such as feed. Ministers agreed to obtain approvals to include feed costs associated with rented pasture as an allowable expense ahead of the 2026 program year.

The ministers will meet in person in Winnipeg Sept. 7-9, at which time they will continue reviewing allowable expenses under AgriStability.

Trade was also on the agenda at the virtual meeting, both interprovincial and international.

Meanwhile, MacDonald said his next trip is to Toronto to tout the benefits of agriculture to the investment community. He said he is trying to push the envelope for agricultural success, which has strong positive implications for the Canadian economy.

He also said he can’t overemphasize the collaboration and support he has received from his provincial and territorial counterparts since becoming minister in May.

More to come.

The post Agriculture ministers agree to AgriStability changes appeared first on Alberta Farmer Express.

Prime Minister Mark Carney got approval on March 23 to dissolve the 44th Parliament of Canada and call an election for April 28. Within that tight turnaround, political parties had to get new candidates lined up while incumbents made last-minute decisions on whether to seek re-election. Among those who decided against running again was Brandon-Souris MP Larry Maguire who was a well-known farmer before entering politics. For those who remain in the game, signs sprouted in snow-covered front yards before the first shoots of spring had the chance to poke up out of the ground.

Within that time, party leaders and candidates have done their level best to get their messages out, but as former prime minister Kim Campbell was infamously quoted to have once said, “an election is no time to discuss serious issues.”

At the time it was seen as a devastating misstep, though she claimed she was misquoted. In the end, nine years of accumulated resentment towards former Prime Minister Brian Mulroney came crashing down on her in a historic defeat.

Unfortunately for all of us, she may have had a point, assuming the popular interpretation of her words.

As much as we like to think elections are the time to bring the big issues to the fore, most of us only ever see the leaders hustle from brief event to brief event, from soundbite to soundbite, or knocking on doors with the local candidates in whatever ridings are too close to call. Even the leadership debates, in which discussion of the issues is ostensibly the whole point, are held to tight schedules and quick or superficial answers by both the debate format and the confines of a TV or radio broadcast.

Making matters far worse is the domination of this federal election cycle by the pronouncements of the one politician who isn’t even in the running.

United States President Donald Trump’s protectionist ramblings, punctuated by incredibly insulting commentary about Canada, are understandably all that anyone is talking about, right now — and very possibly for the next four years or more.

Within that context, matters such as the well-being of the agriculture sector are discussed mainly in terms of collateral damage.

Even the parties’ agriculture-adjacent announcements — such as on capital gains, AgriStability, export market development, supply management et cetera — are made under pressure of economic threats facing both the export-dependent and supply-managed sectors.

So what are voters to do to make their feelings known? One could, of course, answer the phone when pollsters — or people claiming to be pollsters — start calling, but that doesn’t allow for any nuance in response.

We’ve been running a feature on Glacier FarmMedia websites this month titled, “What do you want to know before voting in Canada’s federal election?” and I do recommend taking part in that if you haven’t already.

I won’t make any predictions about the outcome, but I will make one more suggestion.

If there’s a serious issue affecting your life or your livelihood that hasn’t yet been made clear in any policy document or on the campaign trail with just days to go before the vote — reach out to your local candidates.

Even if that candidate doesn’t have a whisper of hope in your riding, but their party has a good chance of being able to sway public policy after an election, reach out.

Be clear, be thoughtful, be respectful, be patient and be prepared to educate someone who may not have a grasp of the issue. The candidates — and their parties — want to know what matters are top of mind with voters and it’s both our privilege and our responsibility to inform them.

Even if this isn’t the time to discuss serious issues, it’s certainly time to make sure the people volunteering for public office know what those issues are.

The post Electioneering overload appeared first on Alberta Farmer Express.

The federal and provincial governments extended the deadline to July 31 from April 30.

AgriStability is a business risk management designed to cushion producers against large income declines.

“Farmers experiencing losses are encouraged to apply for interim payments under AgriStability for more rapid support,” said a federal news release.

In March, in response to China’s tariffs on Canadian peas, canola oil and meal, pork and seafood, Agriculture Minister Kody Blois increased the AgriStability compensation rate to 90 per cent from 80 per cent and doubled the $3-million payment cap for the 2025 year

Two thirds of provinces must approve the changes for them to go into effect.

The post AgriStability deadline extended appeared first on Alberta Farmer Express.

The announcement came late afternoon on Saturday, Mar. 22, ahead of prime minister Mark Carney’s election call on Mar. 23.

Agriculture minister Kody Blois said the agriculture sector is experiencing multiple challenges, including the 100-per cent tariff on canola oil, meal and peas and 25-per cent tariffs on some pork, fish and seafood products. There is also continuing uncertainty regarding what the United States might do.

The support is coming through AgriStability, by increasing the compensation rate from 80 per cent to 90 per cent and doubling the $3-million payment cap for the 2025 year.

“To get money to producers faster, the Government of Canada has also provided provincial and territorial governments with the option to proactively enter into an agreement to issue interim payments at a higher payment rate and initiate targeted advance payments in the event of tariffs, or for the hog sector in the event of African Swine Fever,” the news release said.

In provinces that adopt the changes, producers who participate in AgriStability would be eligible for an interim payment of up to 75 per cent of their estimated final payment.

The government said an administrator will be able to establish the targeted advance payments “where analysis shows that market disruptions have resulted in a sufficient loss to trigger AgriStability payments for a particular sector or region.”

Blois said China’s decision will have a devastating impact on farm families. He said the announcement is a direct result of advocacy from producers.

“I will continue to stand shoulder-to-shoulder with our producers and will defend the sector every step of the way,” he said.

The post AgriStability compensation for farmers increased in face of Chinese tariffs appeared first on Alberta Farmer Express.

It would likely put business risk management spending under the microscope as costs have soared in recent years, and the leaders of both major parties currently campaigning to be prime minister are talking about spending less.

“It is worth noting the cost of the BRM suite effectively doubled between 2019-20 and 2023-24,” said CAPI managing director and co-author of the report Tyler McCann. “The cost to Agriculture Canada alone for their 60 per cent is over $2 billion, most of that because of the increased costs of crop insurance.”

‘Sacred cows’

The report notes, however, that BRM programs are “sacred cows” that both farmers and politicians would like to preserve. It said the question is not just how much is spent but how effective it is spent.

“To the crop insurance cost, I think that the industry itself needs to understand that we’re living in a world today where the impact of the trade war that we’re in could do more harm to farmers than a drought does, but we have a significant substantial BRM program to respond to drought, but we don’t have a substantial program to respond to trade wars,” McCann said.

Federal agriculture spending flows through several channels. For example, the department itself had a budget of about $4.2 billion in 2024-25, but there are other organizations such as the Canadian Food Inspection Agency and Pest Management Regulatory Agency that are funded through other departments.

McCann said the Sustainable Canadian Agricultural Partnership is usually referred to as a $3-billion program, but it’s cost-shared and doesn’t include the BRM suite.

“That ag policy framework is actually a $15-billion initiative, and probably on track to be more than now, because of the significant cost of the BRM suite,” he said. “I think we need to be more transparent and understand that there are significant implications of that spending.”

There are questions about the sustainability of the crop insurance program, although government rarely says that out loud, he said. The report said everything should be on the table for review, including the sacred cows and politically sensitive programs that are often off the table.

“This status quo bias can perpetuate inefficiencies and prevent the reallocation of resources to more effective or innovative initiatives,” the report said. “Audit reports consistently highlight problems and gaps, yet these findings often fail to translate into meaningful changes, instead gathering dust on shelves.”

How effective is the spending?

Despite this substantial support for agriculture stakeholders always call for more. A review would look at how effective the spending is rather than just the funding level.

The report, co-authored with Elisabeta Lika, suggests the review proceed the way it did during the Jean Chretien government of the 1990s when it applied a test across government to assess its role and value for money. This differs from the last review of the across-the-board cuts through Stephen Harper’s Deficit Reduction Action Plan completed in 2012.

The 1995 program review used six-test methodology to make decisions, beginning with the question of whether a program continues to serve a public interest. If the answer was no, it was abandoned or transferred.

If yes, the question became if there was a legitimate role for the government, followed by whether it should be federal or provincial government, if the activities could be transferred to the private sector, how it could be more efficient and finally, if the result is affordable within fiscal restraint.

McCann and Lika applied the six tests to several areas of agricultural spending, noting the challenges of federal-provincial-territorial relations and business risk management programs, along with what they called hidden complexities of the role of the department and public goods, climate change, market volatility and supply chain issues, and program cycles and performance measurement gaps.

McCann said a program review undertaken right away would allow enough time before the next version of the agricultural policy framework is negotiated and launched in 2028.

The authors reviewed AgriInvest specifically and found it probably doesn’t pass the public good test, he said, because it is intended to help producers manage small fluctuations that a typical business should be able to manage.

“Similarly the examination of on-farm programs (On-Farm Climate Action Fund, Agricultural Clean Technology Program) highlights potential duplication with provincial efforts,” the report said. “The lack of clarity between federal and provincial roles has increased as AAFC has shifted to funding more on-farm activities.”

But the historic practice is to let provinces lead, meaning the programs don’t pass the federalism test, McCann said.

Funding innovation

In the area of innovation, McCann said there is a strong case for government to fund it but in a different way.

“The last example we use is trade and market access. Given the climate that we’re in, if anything there’s a greater public role and opportunity to actually spend more in that space than they’re spending today,” he said.

McCann added the context of a trade war with the United States puts extra pressure on the need for review because everyone requires a clear sense of whether programs align with priorities, meet the test of the moment, or if governments are providing them just because they have been for 30 years.

“We don’t often have this conversation in agriculture and we do live in a reality where often the response is always, ‘we need government to invest more.’ I think there is a strong argument to be made for governments to invest more in the ag space, but I think before we do that we need to really look at what they’re spending today already and ask ourselves the questions around is it being spent the right way and are we getting the right result.”

He said typically the reviews happen behind closed doors and CAPI would like more of this discussion out in the open.

The post Policy institute calls for open review of ag spending appeared first on Alberta Farmer Express.