If the “Agri” programs were adjusted properly, they could be an interesting option. We agree that the AgriStability program, whose coverage has been reduced to 70%, is not adequate. If the coverage stayed at 85%, we think it would still be a good program.
In some cases, some years when farmers are paid more than their production costs because of the market conditions, there may be some negative consequences. However, it is best to have a good coverage at 85% and to include a corrective measure to prevent abuses due to market conditions.
To that end, we could learn from what Quebec has done. Following cuts to the AgriStability program at the federal level, the Financière agricole du Québec developed the Agri-Québec Plus program, which, however, has not delivered the expected results.
At least, the Government of Quebec, which supports agriculture through the Financière agricole, has recognized that the AgriStability program, with a coverage at 70%, was not working and was not providing the support needed by farms.