Good morning. It’s James Keller in Calgary.
A vague plan from the federal government to set emission targets from nitrogen-based fertilizer has inflamed critics and provided fodder for candidates running in conservative leadership races in Alberta and federally.
Ottawa has set a target to bring fertilizer emissions down 30 per cent from 2020 levels by 2030. The idea was first announced in December of 2020, and the federal government has never framed it as a hard cap or suggested there would be any kind of enforcement to get there.
But a mix of politics and distrust of the federal Liberals among some farmers have fuelled recent criticism of the targets, including claims that Ottawa plans to impose hard caps on fertilizer use in a way that could imperil Canada’s food supply.
Agriculture Minister Marie-Claude Bibeau has tried to clean up a muddled rollout and push back against those criticisms. She told The Globe’s Alanna Smith that there are no plans for regulations that would impose an enforceable cap. Instead, the government is proposing incentives for farmers and funding for research into new technology that could make it easier to cut down emissions while keeping yields up.
She argues that cutting emissions is not the same thing as cutting fertilizer use, and proponents of the targets argue there are changes to farming practices that could reduce emissions without hurting production.
The government’s repeated assurances haven’t stopped critics of the federal Liberals from taking the fertilizer issue and running with it.
In Alberta, several candidates in the United Conservative Party leadership campaign to replace Premier Jason Kenney have held up the fertilizer targets as yet another instance of Ottawa attacking the province’s interests.
One of the front-runners, Danielle Smith, called the plan a “direct attack on Alberta farmers” and claimed it violated the Constitution. She added it to the list of issues she plans to target with a proposed Alberta Sovereignty Act, which purports to give the province the authority to ignore some federal laws. (Constitutional experts had widely condemned the proposed law.)
Pierre Poilievre, who is considered the favourite to win the federal Conservative Party leadership race next month, has also vowed to fight what he has characterized as a forced reduction that would put crops at risk.
The Premiers of Saskatchewan and Manitoba have also been vocal opponents of the targets.
One of the reasons the fertilizer issue has gained so much traction – and why the federal government’s assurances have been met with so much skepticism – is because of lingering resentment of the impact of the carbon tax on the agricultural sector. There have long been calls to exempt agriculture entirely or change how the tax is applied, such as by exempting grain drying, which uses a lot of fuel.
Agriculture made up about 10 per cent of Canada’s greenhouse gas emissions or 73 megatonnes of carbon dioxide in 2019, primarily from ruminant livestock like cattle, crop production and on-farm fuel use, according to Ottawa. Emissions from synthetic fertilizers accounted for about 13 megatonnes.
This is the weekly Western Canada newsletter written by B.C. Editor Wendy Cox and Alberta Bureau Chief James Keller. If you’re reading this on the web, or it was forwarded to you from someone else, you can sign up for it and all Globe newsletters here.
Editor’s note: A previous version of this story provided emissions totals for the agriculture industry in tonnes instead of megatonnes. In fact, the agricultural sector accounted for 73 megatonnes of carbon dioxide in 2019 and emissions from synthetic fertilizers accounted for about 13 megatonnes.
Wendy Cox
James Keller