The Carney government just dropped a $3.2 billion food security strategy and it’s worth understanding what it actually does.
Right now, only 11 cents of every dollar you spend on groceries reaches the farmer who grew it. Five companies control 80% of the grocery market. And Canada exports billions in agricultural products while turning around and importing processed versions of the same food from the US at a markup.
This plan attacks that problem structurally. $1 billion goes toward food terminals and distribution hubs so independent grocers can buy directly from Canadian farmers, cutting out the middleman. The Competition Bureau gets a funding boost to go after the property control tricks big grocers use to block competitors from moving in nearby. And Farm Credit Canada gets $1 billion for domestic food processing so we stop exporting raw product and importing it back as something more expensive.
The targets are concrete: expand the Ontario Food Terminal by end of year, open two new food terminals and 10 regional food hubs by 2028.
This isn’t a handout to Loblaws. It’s infrastructure to break their stranglehold on the supply chain.
Will it fix your grocery bill overnight? No. But building real competition into the system is how you get lasting price relief, not a rebate that disappears after one quarter.
You can’t make this stuff up. Danielle Smith has appointed right-wing academic Jack Mintz to chair a panel that will look into the pros and cons of separatism. Mintz has previously argued that “Albexit” makes sense. And, Smith wants us to believe she’s opposed to separation. 😡
@Duss88@jdurocker@TheBreakdownAB If you are not promoting the new boundaries why comment? They do not help rural areas at all. Cities and rural areas have different needs and should have independent representation.
@mrbgilson@treadheavynow The separatists are doing more for the Liberal government than they are for their own movement. Support has grown for the provincial NDP as well. They are pushing moderate voters away from the UCP.
@Duss88@jdurocker@TheBreakdownAB Calgary and Edmonton were already thriving urban centers before Alberta's first major oil strike occurred. Edmonton was established in 1795 as a HBC trading post, and Calgary was established in 1875 as a NWMP fort which quickly grew after the arrival of the railway.
@Duss88@jdurocker@TheBreakdownAB Not to mention that the property taxes paid by Calgarians pay for the services received by those within rural areas. So maybe the rural areas wouldn't fair so well without the cities.
@Duss88@jdurocker@TheBreakdownAB Calgary exists as a major economic, service, and administrative hub rather than solely to support rural areas. Edmonton exists primarily as a major urban hub, serving a diverse mix of government, energy, and educational sectors.
@ikwilson "But here’s the problem. Due to the 'fixed-growth rule' introduced by the Harper government in 2009, the amount spent on equalization increases whether or not the gap between 'have not' and 'have' provinces increases or decreases."
@david_parker The lack of energy likely comes from Albertans starting to realize that separating from Canada would not be as simple or as profitable a decision as many would like them to believe.
@cl_780@gsillak@DustyRoseYYC Girl... go read up on the constitution. The resource transfer agreements are tied to the constitution. It's not the same as you going out a buying a piece of property. Quit trying to dumb it down. They would become void and everything would need to be renegotiated.
@sdyll1@aiken_fella@Rep_Stansbury Fact... the Trump family has pocketed over $1.8 billion. So just stop with the Burisma bullshit. https://t.co/2EyrfilAfV
@RiseOfAlberta Expect this entire separatist movement is pushing progressive conservatives to support the NDP. It won't succeed. You don't have the support. But it will help the NDP win the next provincial election.
Did you guys know that Calgary and Edmonton send equalization payments to the rural towns in Alberta?
Jeromy Farkas is making this a great argument.
No more equalization payments to Caroline, Alberta.
Why should my property taxes pay for Caroline to have health services?
@ikwilson What is missing from your plan is the fact that separation would void the transfer agreements, and resource rights would revert to federal control.
@ikwilson Leave then? Just don't expect to keep our natural resources. The Natural Resources Transfer Agreement (NRTA) is tied to the Canadian Constitution. Separation would void this, meaning resource rights would revert to federal control.
@cl_780@gsillak@DustyRoseYYC Yep. The Natural Resources Transfer Agreement (NRTA) of 1930, which gave Alberta control over its Crown lands and resources, is tied to the Canadian Constitution. Separation would void this, meaning resource rights would revert to federal control.