Recent events have troubled me. For instance, the public’s reaction to the Montmarquette report on establishing user fees for public services. The report’s message is that Québécois are not paying fair market value for the government goods and services they are enjoying. In other words, based on the principle of user must pay, we should be paying more if we want to ensure the continuity of these goods and services, whether they are the quality of a university education, bridges and roads, daycare services or water quality. And yet, this report generated such indignation on the part of several political observers and the population as a whole that our minority government has already laid it to rest.

Too bad, because this report allowed us to understand that we are heading towards a very difficult situation if we don’t alter our course. We can always ignore the statements made in the report, but that will not change reality, which means that someone will eventually have to pay. This definitely breaks the myth of a Québec committed to the environment and social justice. Think about it, if water and electricity were paid at their fair market value, would we still see people melt snow banks with a garden hose on a sunny winter day? Would we still leave all the lights on in the house when we’re all in the same room? And what about this “legacy” we are gifting to future generations? A geriatric population that will cost a fortune to finance their health care and pension plans, with an added bonus of third-world-like infrastructures. Let’s hope that this next generation will be attending foreign schools to get their education since our university education system is losing steam fast due to lack of funding. As for those who, in the name of social justice and the underprivileged, well, they’re completely off course. Focus should go to the working-poor’s income not on their expenditures. For example, let’s imagine that the price of electricity doubles, so much so that at the current level of consumption, a person that is part of the world of the working poor would have to pay some $1,000 more for the same service. The margin released by the increased rate for the population as a whole would allow the working poor’s income to increase by $1,000 (this is the issue on which our arguments should be based). Because of the high price of electricity, people as a whole, especially the working poor, would be keeping a closer eye on their electricity consumption and could, realistically reduce their electricity bill by some $800, which means they would be $200 richer than before the price hike.

Closer to home, a discussion on our collective wealth and the role of the State can also be transposed onto agriculture, just look at the ASRA program, with an actuarial deficit nearing 600 million dollars. The situation is not easy and brings us quite a few questions. Should we maintain the current level of production that is largely exported, such as pork, but does not elicit payments every year? Inversely, should we maintain the current level of support for productions such as lamb, which has always received compensation? Should we be more sophisticated and not necessarily support all farms the same way even if they produce the same thing? Does a farm with more than 1,000 head of sheep cost as much to produce as a farm with only 120 head of sheep? Do both types of farm operations need the same kind of help to move forward?

Just as society will eventually have to accept that some changes need to be made to products and services provided by the State in terms of fees, Québec’s agrifood industry will also have to revise some of its programs to make them better and more performing. In both cases could this be adequately accomplished within a reasonable timeframe? If I had to lay down a wager, money would be on the agrifood industry.

Maurice Doyon is an Associate Professor and Graduate Program Chair, Department of Agricultural Economics and Consumer Science, Université Laval. He is also a member of the Centre de Recherche en Économie agroalimentaire (CRÉA) with that same department, auxiliary professor with the University of Maine, associate researcher with the Centre interuniversitaire de recherche en analyse des organisations in Montréal and associate researcher with the Neutraceuticals and Functional Foods Institute (NIAF). Furthermore, he holds a doctorate degree in Applied Economics from Cornell University, as well as a Master’s degree from this same institution. Mr. Doyon has received over fifteen grants and merits throughout his distinguished academic career.