Article content continued

First and foremost, it is important to recognize that investors purchase farmland in order to make money. The way to make money is to make farms more efficient and increase their output. Foreign investment would not only bring billions of dollars into Saskatchewan’s economy, it would also bring more efficient agricultural techniques. Indeed, any investments would not only go to the landowners who sell their land, but also to the suppliers of agricultural products, whose goods would be in demand as small farms turned into larger commercial operations.

And although property values would increase, making it harder for independent operators to expand their operations, this would benefit any farmers looking to sell their properties (as well as municipalities, which would see increased property tax revenues). At the moment, anyone looking to get out of the market is forced to sell their farmland for prices that don’t reflect the land’s full potential value. There’s no reason why the owner of a house in Regina should be able to benefit from high property values due to foreign investment, while the owner of a house on the prairies is forced to sell for artificially depressed prices.

But farmers, who tend to vote conservative, have never been ideologues: They often paradoxically insist that governments stay out of their business, until economic realities start to affect their businesses. As soon as natural disaster strikes or commodity prices fall, farmers are always the first to call for Big Government bailouts, price controls or restrictions on investments. A truly fiscally conservative government would have the gumption to tell farmers that they will have to deal with the same market forces as any other business. The question is: Do we have any fiscally conservative governments left in this country?

National Post

jkline@nationalpost.com

Twitter.com/accessd