This is the third in a three part series on agriculture.

The previous two columns pointed out that Canadian farmers are currently making one fourth the income they made 30 years ago, and that with the exception of certain sectors like supply management, Canadian agriculture is in serious trouble. We also pointed out the causes for this severe drop in income. Here we will focus on some possible solutions.

First, farm groups and associations have got to merge, in order to provide one powerful voice for Canadian agriculture. There are only 230,000 farms left in Canada, and yet the farming industry is represented by a myriad of different groups and associations, often contradicting each other.

Second, governments need to implement a “Made in Canada” branding strategy for Canadian food products. Canadian food products in stores should be clearly labeled so consumers can make an informed choice.

Third, governments need to encourage greater secondary and tertiary production of food products in Canada. The recent beef border closure highlighted what risks there are in moving food processing outside of the country.

Fourth, and most importantly, governments need to address the fundamental problem in Canadian agriculture: low farm incomes. Ultimately, the solution to low farm incomes is not going to come from greater efficiencies and lower input costs, but from higher revenue. That higher revenue must come from somewhere, whether that be from governments or consumers. This can be accomplished by reducing subsidies abroad, by increasing subsidies domestically, or by restricting imports by imposing tariffs. Ultimately, any solution involves paying a little more for food.

Let me address one question many bring up at this point: If other countries produce cheaper food, why not simply import? Why even produce our own food?

My response is very simple. No country, no civilization has survived long without the ability to produce its own food. History has shown that a society’s ability to survive is linked to the security and certainty of its food supply. This food supply is at too great a risk of disruption - from trade wars and other threats - if we rely exclusively on imports. Obviously, certain food stuffs, like oranges, and bananas, cannot be grown here, or only grown here marginally, and will always need to be imported. But basic foodstuffs that can be grown here should be grown here.

We protect our airlines, our cable companies, our telephone companies, our newspapers, our healthcare and our cultural sector. These are all protected because they are considered essential to our national interest. What is more vital to our national interest than food? Food and shelter are more fundamental than anything else.

Most importantly, a healthy democracy and a good society require a vibrant agricultural sector. Farming is what settled this country, carving out of the wilderness small towns and townships, counties and cities, building the society we have today. The essential nature of farming is something the French understand, embodied in their word “terroir”, translated as our word “earth”, but something richer in meaning. It is something that was once put to me by a local farmer who talked about “good ground”. It was best put by one of the intellectual forces behind democracy on this continent who said in 1785, “Cultivators of the earth are the most valuable citizens. They are the most vigorous, the most independent, the most virtuous, and they are tied to their country and wedded to its liberty and interests by the most lasting bonds.”