The following editorial, from the Ontario Corn Producers Association, is one of several that have been appearing in the media recently asking the Ontario government to focus on science rather than emotion when it comes to making policies that impact farmers.

The Ontario Federation of Agriculture has been vocal on the issue, as has AGCare and Guelph Mercury columnist Owen Roberts. But these words from the Corn Producers – although they echo the other voices – are my favourite.
*****

Whenever the public starts to take an interest in pesticides on the farm it seems the collective farm community bristles a little bit. That’s because crop protection products (that’s what we call them now) are so often feared and misunderstood in the general public.
In October the Canadian Cancer Society held a conference, “Exploring the connection” looking at the connection between pesticides and cancer.

The conference brought together stakeholders from medicine, research, environment, government, and agriculture to hear about the regulations currently in place, research underway, and what’s happening around the world.

A public opinion study commissioned by the Canadian Cancer Society prior to the event revealed some startling information about what’s on Canadians’ minds. According to the study, more than half of Canadians do not feel they receive enough information about pesticides to make informed choices about the food they buy.

Nearly three quarters of Canadians say they would support stronger regulations aimed at reducing the use of pesticides in food production.

At the conference, leading medical researchers admitted there is no direct connection between pesticides and cancer rates. Attendees from outside of Canada acknowledged that Canada’s food safety and pesticide regulatory systems are among the best in the world. Many people left with a better understanding of what happens on the farm, and how farmers already limit their chemical use with tools such as GPS and other new technologies.

What was refreshing about this event is the attention that was given to the importance of sound science. Cancer is an emotional subject that has affected so many Canadians – rural and urban – in very personal ways. It was encouraging that the Canadian Cancer Society was willing to take an objective look at the evidence that exists, and to involve all stakeholders in the process. That kind of approach sets the stage for an amicable working relationship in future initiatives.

What’s confusing, then, is why the Ontario government is proposing new pesticide regulations that are not based on science. The proposed regulations would eliminate the use of cosmetic pesticides across the province.

Banning cosmetic pesticides is a slippery slope for Ontario agriculture. First, it puts fields at greater risk of weed infestations from urban areas where the proposed regulations would ban the use of products to control them.

Secondly, what kind of message is it sending to Ontario residents who might be inclined to ask: If chemicals are too dangerous to spray on our lawns, why can farmers spray them on the food we eat? That’s a bold statement to make, and there had better be some solid information on which to base it.

If there’s science to prove that those chemicals have a detrimental effect on our health or the health of the environment, then farmers want to see it.

Farm families are no strangers to cancer, and nobody wants to put their families, consumers, or environment at increased risk. But we have yet to see a scientific study credibly make that link. We deserve more from our provincial policy makers.