Evidence of meeting #68 for Agriculture and Agri-Food in the 39th Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was motions.
A recording is available from Parliament.
3:35 p.m.
Conservative
3:35 p.m.
Conservative
David Anderson Conservative Cypress Hills—Grasslands, SK
Mr. Chair, I'd like to make a motion that the committee conclude its deliberations and complete its report on the APF before it considers any other business.
There are a couple of reasons for that. One is that we now have four motions before the committee and a number of others I think that are coming to the committee over the next couple of days.
Also, I'd like to read into the record a letter that was received by the members of the committee from the Canadian Federation of Agriculture, which will make it clear that this motion is a good motion and one that we should support.
3:35 p.m.
Bloc
André Bellavance Bloc Richmond—Arthabaska, QC
That's all right, we have it. All members of the committee have received the letter. There's no need to read it.
3:35 p.m.
Conservative
David Anderson Conservative Cypress Hills—Grasslands, SK
I think it's important that it be read into the—
3:35 p.m.
Liberal
Wayne Easter Liberal Malpeque, PE
If Mr. Anderson is putting forward a motion, we require 48 hours' notice on that motion.
3:35 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative James Bezan
I don't believe we do on this. If this is a procedural motion, it doesn't require notice. You're out of order.
Mr. Anderson.
3:35 p.m.
Conservative
David Anderson Conservative Cypress Hills—Grasslands, SK
It's written to the chair:
As you know, the Canadian Federation of Agriculture and its member organizations are very much involved in the ongoing process to develop the next generation of Canadian agriculture policy. We strongly believe that development process must happen in partnership between government and industry, with the maximum possible amount of input and consultation from all partners in the industry. The next generation of agriculture policy is critical for the future success and sustainability of our industry.
CFA believes the work of the House of Commons Standing Committee on Agriculture has done a meeting with witnesses in Ottawa, and holding cross-country consultations is an important part of the process. The outcomes of those consultations will no doubt provide additional valuable input for the development of the new policy framework.
CFA is concerned that with the other issues before the committee and with reports in the media of a possible early end to the parliamentary session, the committee will not be able to prepare and table a report on its work this spring. The current government timetable will see the major work on the new policy framework taking place this spring and into the summer. If the committee's report is not released until the fall of the year, its ideas, conclusions, and recommendations will come too late to be included in the development process.
The CFA therefore strongly urges you and the members of the committee to make the next generation of agriculture a priority. We ask you to make your best effort to make sure your report is released in this parliamentary session, so that we can include and build on your work as we head into the most important phase of the development process. We believe it is in the best interests of Canadian farmers.
It's signed by Bob Friesen, president, Canadian Federation of Agriculture.
Mr. Chair, I bring this up because in the past, on at least two occasions, I've made the point to the committee that we needed to move quickly on this issue. I think it was probably last October or November when I first raised that and said I thought it was important that the committee begin to focus on this issue and get the APF hearings and consultations under way so that we could play an important part in giving the minister advice on the new programs. That did not happen, because it got derailed by a number of other issues through October, November, December.
When we came back after the Christmas break, I remember also urging the committee to do this as quickly as possible and to make sure that we have our APF consultations done, so that we once again could still have the ability to influence the APF conclusions that are being reached.
I'm afraid from what I'm seeing that we're going to find ourselves in the situation that our report is going to come out too late to have a major influence on the direction of the policy framework. Members opposite have brought forward a number of motions, and of course we're going to take time to debate those motions at the appropriate time. We think this is not the appropriate time, that it would be better for us right now to focus on the APF report, to work our way through its conclusions, and then, in that way, be able to have an influence on the government's decisions regarding the policy framework.
That's why I've brought this issue up, Mr. Chair. I think it's important that we continue to work on the report. I think it's important that we do that ahead of anything else. So I'm asking the members on both sides of the table to do that and to work with us to get this report done as quickly as possible. It would be unfortunate if we're going to focus on motions for the next two weeks in this committee when that's not necessary.
3:35 p.m.
Conservative
3:35 p.m.
Conservative
Barry Devolin Conservative Haliburton—Kawartha Lakes—Brock, ON
I want to agree with David that we as a committee should focus on finishing our report. We put a lot of time and effort into it and a lot of expense travelling across the country. I think we had an agreement at the committee that this was a priority for us this spring.
Quite frankly, I have two or three issues that I personally have strong views on that I'd like to get on the agenda as well, and if the way to do that is to bring forward motions, I guess I'll be compelled to be drawn into that process too. I'm not suggesting that motions shouldn't be dealt with, but I would agree with the notion that we should make the report our priority to work on getting that done. Once that is tabled in the House, then we ought to still have time to deal with these motions.
3:35 p.m.
Conservative
Larry Miller Conservative Bruce—Grey—Owen Sound, ON
Thanks, Mr. Chairman.
I am, of course, going to support the motion, simply for the reason that to come up with APF-2 is something this committee has worked very hard at, as have staff, for months now, and really, probably more like the last couple of years for parts of it. For us not to deal with the report, when we all know there's a looming deadline—at some point, the House is going to shut down for the summer.... I think there's no doubt that most of us here have a very sincere worry about the state of agriculture and how to make it better. If we don't deal with this report, gentlemen, around the table here, I think we're not just letting farmers down, but letting the process down and ourselves.
As far as the motion is concerned, Mr. Anderson's motion still leaves room to debate the motions that are on the agenda. I have to point out that there's no doubt there's a difference of opinion on some things from time to time, and I respect that, but there's no doubt that at least the motion we're debating at the present time is about politics. I think for the good of agriculture and the work we've done here.... It'll all be for naught if we don't spend the majority of our time here dealing with the actual report.
I'm leaving it at that, Mr. Chairman. I'm going to support the motion and go from there.
3:40 p.m.
Liberal
Wayne Easter Liberal Malpeque, PE
Okay. Thanks.
First, before making remarks on this, Mr. Chair, I'll speak really on a point of order, partly based on the performance by Mr. Anderson here just a moment ago with his motion. I've had fairly strong confidence in you as chair, Mr. Chairman, but I do need you to tell us whether we're following Jay Hill's rules of procedure, which is to basically disrupt committees and prevent them from getting their work done, or whether you're following the regular rules.
3:40 p.m.
Conservative
David Anderson Conservative Cypress Hills—Grasslands, SK
I think we're trying to have an intelligent discussion here about the priorities of the committee and the way we're going to proceed, and I'd appreciate it if Mr. Easter would stay on that as well.
3:40 p.m.
Liberal
3:40 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative James Bezan
Well, we're definitely following procedure here. Mr. Anderson was compelled to move a motion. He got my attention right off, at the beginning of the meeting, to move this motion. This doesn't require notice. This is about, in his opinion, as I'm listening here, wanting to get back to finish off the report before we deal with other business.
3:40 p.m.
Liberal
Wayne Easter Liberal Malpeque, PE
No, I'm not just talking about this motion, Mr. Chair. We've seen a lot of obstruction by the government that is quite unusual. We saw it the other day at committee from Mr. Anderson as he filibustered the motions. We on this side need to know whether we're following the manual, as I understand, put out by Jay Hill or whether we're following the rules of procedure as established by committees, on which you get advice from the clerk. That's what we need to know before we start.
3:40 p.m.
Conservative
Larry Miller Conservative Bruce—Grey—Owen Sound, ON
I think this has already been cleared up once. Every government—past governments, the present government—has different strategies they use. I suppose that's the document Mr. Easter's referring to. There are procedural rules, and I think it's insulting to the chair and to our clerk sitting beside him, who has acknowledged that the chairman has said it's dealing with our procedure bylaw, and I think that's enough said on the issue. Let's get on to business.