POLICY PROMOTER
BY IAN DOIG • ILLUSTRATION BY EMILY CHU
A formative experience, Tyler McCann spent almost a decade in the federal government, primarily as an advisor to then Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada Minister Gerry Ritz. McCann and his wife Gillian MacDougall grew up on cattle and dairy farms respectively, and upon McCann’s exit from government in 2017, they established a herd of 60 purebred Simmental cattle on 200 acres in western Quebec.
Since 2020, McCann has served as managing director of the Canadian Agri-Food Policy Institute (CAPI), a national thinktank. While he tends to downplay his own operation as a hobby farm, he admits it is a lot of work. In the white-collar world, it keeps him grounded.
GrainsWest: How has your farming background contributed to your policy work?
Tyler McCann: It has helped me understand the challenging reality farmers face across the country. There’s no such thing as the average farmer; there’s no one right way to farm in this country. We have, give or take, 175,000 farms in Canada, and they’re all different. They’re very diverse businesses.
What does this mean from a policy perspective? In a set of policies, you must reflect that farms are all very different and it is hard, risky and challenging work. It’s not easy, and tough choices must be made. One challenge we run into is governments aren’t prepared to make tough choices and understand the realities people face.
GW: What led you into ag policy work?
TM: I have a diploma in farm management and technology from Macdonald College in Sainte-Anne-de-Bellevue, QC. I did a semester of agri-economics and quit that degree because I wanted to do political science. I quit the political science degree because I was offered a job working for the agriculture minister.
GW: What has shaped your approach to ag policy work?
TM: My wife and I met through 4-H, and now we’ve got four kids, ages six through 13, in 4-H. I sit on the 4-H Canada board, and my wife is the sole employee of Quebec 4-H. I live by the 4-H model of learn to do by doing. I’ve had the chance to learn agriculture, policy and politics by doing.
I’ve done consulting work for a variety of different businesses. I also worked as interim executive director of the Grain Growers of Canada and the Canadian Seed Trade Association, which became Seeds Canada.
I gained a real appreciation for member management and delivering on the priorities of ag association members—trying to keep what can be a very diverse membership base happy and satisfied. Those two association jobs gave me the chance to work with grain farmers from across the country, learn a lot about the seed sector and work with businesses.
GW: Describe your time with the federal government.
TM: I also worked for the transport minister and the natural resources minister, but I joined minister Ritz’s team shortly after he was appointed. For someone who cares about the sector, it was an amazing opportunity and an incredible experience. The minister wanted to change things and have an impact. I was involved in negotiating trade agreements with Europe and the Trans-Pacific Partnership, and we worked on compensation for supply managed sectors. I often joke I was cursed in that my first job was probably the best job I’ll ever have.
GW: What does CAPI offer the ag industry?
TM: When I came to CAPI, the board of directors wanted to improve the relevancy and the impact of the organization. We have tried to make our work more relevant to associations, farmers, governments and ag businesses as well as to those outside of agriculture. And to make the work we do more impactful by talking to these people about the outcomes of the work that we do and why the policy changes we put forward make sense and should be considered and adopted.
GW: How does the organization choose its projects?
TM: We’re a small organization with limited resources, so we try to not overlap and duplicate the work of other organizations. We think about where we can fill gaps and add value to ag policy dialog. An example is we try to bring forward ideas that reflect the innovation continuum, to bring the partners together and develop common solutions and policy recommendations.
We’re doing an increasing amount of work around digital agriculture and artificial intelligence, because it is an emerging area.
An overarching gap is on systemic issues that cross commodities, regions or links on the value chain. We as a sector don’t often think systemically. We think about what it means for the beef sector or a grain farmer, but governments tend to think broadly about agriculture. Things like our annual Agri-Food Risk Report looks at systemic issues across agriculture and food.
GW: How does CAPI work to inform and advise government and industry groups?
TM: We do a lot of engagement and outreach. We evaluate the perspectives of people in government, businesses, associations and industry groups. Providing advice and information is often about going back to people through the development process. The fact it’s a cycle makes informing and advising easier.
GW: In which areas is federal agricultural policy outdated?
TM: In general, Canadian agriculture policy has failed to keep up with the times. Over the last 25 years, what happens on farms, in processing facilities and other places has changed drastically, but ag policy hasn’t kept pace. Agriculture policy has a lot of catching up to do, never mind getting to the point where we’re leading.
GW: What policy areas urgently need an overhaul?
TM: Business risk management policies and programs are in the most urgent need of reform. The risk farmers face continues to increase. We need to move away from risk management policies and programs that are very reactive. They should support and encourage proactive risk management on farms. Programs are very effective in some situations and not in others. We need to be prepared to make changes to get more consistently effective risk management tools to farmers. Farmers need more choice and risk management tools that better reflect the dynamics they face.
GW: What positive developments can you point to in Canadian ag policy?
TM: We’ve seen a renewed focus on competitiveness and growth issues. But the federal government is talking much more about trade today, in part because they’re dealing with the fallout of what’s happening in the United States. There’s a more serious effort around an ag trade agenda than there has been in past. It’s good the government is talking about regulatory reform, but we need to see some stronger outcomes.
GW: How can Canadian agriculture cope with the deterioration of trade relations with the U.S.?
TM: This requires a very different approach to market access and development. Market diversification has a limited benefit in agriculture. Because we are so trade dependent on the U.S. it is important we do all we can to navigate the relationship and maintain market access as successfully as possible. But what can we do to build our domestic market, to add value and process more here?
GW: How can the average farmer influence ag policy?
TM: They need to engage with their advocacy organizations, those farm groups that represent them and work on their behalf in the provincial capitals and Ottawa. They are supposed to do the work to get better ag policy in this country. Farmers should be constructive and support those organizations but expect a lot from them and hold them to account.
Comments