Agriculture Committee on May 30th, 2007

[Garry Breitkreuz, Conservative, Yorkton—Melville, SK]

No, I just wanted to give the chair fair notice that I have some brief comments as well. Please put me on the list.

[The Chair, Conservative, James Bezan]

I'll get to you guys on the list.

Mr. Devolin has the floor. I have Wayne and Larry already on the speakers list, and now Mr. Breitkreuz—and you, too, Mr. Hubbard?

[Barry Devolin, Conservative, Haliburton—Kawartha Lakes—Brock, ON]

I appreciate the intervention. I haven't before suffered from premature congratulations, but I appreciate it.

I am on my last point. What I was looking for here was a column that actually I put out about a month ago, and I'd like to read it into the record, because I think it's important. It's not long; it's only 300 words. The column is called “Buy Local, Eat Local”:

Recently, you may have noticed reference to “local food” or “farm-fresh”, a new trend in food production and selling. As the name implies, local food is all about people buying and eating food produced in their local area. In the extreme, some people only eat local food (goodbye coffee and orange juice). In most cases, people make the conscious effort to buy local food whenever possible. There are three main reasons people give for buying and eating local food. Quality – Some people buy and eat local food because it tastes better, offers better nutritional value and was produced under Canada's world-class food safety standards. Local jobs – Some people buy and eat local food because they want to keep their food dollars in the local economy and support their neighbours' jobs. Environment – Some people buy and eat local food because they know that the further food travels, the bigger its negative environmental impact (i.e. food miles). The bottom line is that any reason to buy and eat local food is a good reason. In the coming months, I encourage you to visit farmers' markets and stop at farm-gate stands. It may take a few minutes, but I predict you will appreciate and enjoy the local food you buy. Take time to think about what you and your family are eating. Take time to think about where your food dollar is going. And take time to consider the miles your food has traveled to get to your plate. For example, our family is happy to participate in a “harvest share” program in Haliburton. Every week in the summer my wife drops by a local farm to pick up a box of local produce. Beyond the obvious food value, Ursula and I recognize that our kids are also learning where food comes from, and when different local foods are in season. In terms of the future of local farms and young farmers, I also believe there are opportunities in the production of local food. For restaurateurs, I encourage you to source local food – and let your customers know that you are serving local food whenever possible. Local food is not the solution to every problem facing agriculture, but I believe it is a step in the right direction for both local farmers and consumers. Buy local. Eat local.

Mr. Chair, we've all heard this, and I think it's a trend that is out there. It's always easier to ride the trend that's already taking hold than to try to create a new one. You can't help but turn on the news at night and you see parents taking over the cafeterias in the schools and kicking out the soft drinks and the fried foods--I was going to say kicking out the french fries, but I didn't want to say anything that could be detrimental to our potato farmers--and putting in nutritious, better food for their kids, and a lot of it is local food. As the father of two young children, I know that I'm concerned about this and I feel guilty when my kids scream at me to stop at the golden horseshoes along the side of the highway and we go in there and I see them shovelling that stuff in and I know it's not good for them.

I think there's an opportunity here. If you Google “local food” or “farm fresh”, you won't believe how many things are going on out there. I know that a lot of these are grassroots organizations that have sprung up. Durham region and Waterloo in Ontario are a couple of examples where this is taking place. I'm not talking about doing anything that's anti-mainstream agriculture or in any way disparaging to the agricultural producers we have in Canada that produce large volumes of commodities that are traded internationally and exported. I recognize the value of that. As I said before, I know that local food is not a panacea for all that ails agriculture, but I do believe that it's a great opportunity that's coming.

I mentioned the poor quality of food that kids and others, including myself, eat at McDonald's sometimes, but I also note that McDonald's sells salads. It has to be a lot harder to sell and deal with fresh fruit and vegetables in that restaurant than it is with frozen hamburger patties, but they're a smart company, so that tells me they're doing it in spite of themselves and because they know their consumers are demanding it.

When I recently heard that Wal-Mart, which is in food in a big way, is going to move into organic, that tells me they've done their research and they see this opportunity too.

While I appreciate that some farmers, especially some traditional farmers, are very skeptical of the organic movement, and I'm not saying it's the be-all and end-all either, the bottom line is I see consumers demanding it and I see that there's an opportunity there.

In my riding, what I want to do is keep the farmers on the land. I want to help keep the same number of acres in production. The bottom line is that if someone can grow organic vegetables and sell them directly to a consumer--we all talk about creating opportunities for farmers to capture a greater portion of the vertical value chain--then I think organic is an excellent way to do that, as an example. There are many people who want to buy local food that's not organic, but they want to know where it comes from. They trust it. I live in sweet corn country, and my grandfather, who is a farmer, put the pot on the stove to boil before he went out to take the corn off the stalk, because he said every minute counted, and it was better if it was in the water within half an hour of it actually being picked. I think that's another opportunity that we as a committee should look into. It's my primary preoccupation in terms of these issues.

I appreciate the attentiveness of my colleagues as I've gone through these, and I hope that with one, two, or three of these I've managed to say something that might cause them to reconsider their support for Mr. Easter's motion and would cause them to join with me in voting against this motion.

Let's have a conversation about the ideas that I've put forward, or maybe some that I've missed that you've come up with, that you would like to see us pursue to create hope for farmers--young farmers, older farmers--across the country, so that they can stay on the land.

One day we'll look back on the farm families options program as a turning point when we decided we were not going to go down that road, which was to figure out how to get farmers off the land, but we actually redoubled our efforts to come up with new and innovative ideas, some of which require money and some of which do not, in an effort to keep Canadian farm families on the land. If that is what we can accomplish here by defeating Mr. Easter's motion, then I think that every minute I've spent on this and every minute that my colleagues are going to spend on this has been well spent.

Thank you.

[The Chair, Conservative, James Bezan]

On a point of order, Mr. Steckle.

[Paul Steckle, Liberal, Huron—Bruce, ON]

In listening to at least part of what Mr. Devolin had to say, I question the sincerity, given that just yesterday we were reminded that there was great urgency in moving forward with the approval and the continuing of study of the APF 2. Given what we're seeing today, again--this would make even bad bedtime reading and would put an old farmer to sleep--I'm sure that you wouldn't impress very many farmers with the kinds of things we've been saying over the last day and a half. I think this is a waste of time, when in fact time is running out on us and we may not get APF 2 done before we leave. I find it appalling that we're spending this time doing this. I find no sincerity in getting this work finished.

[The Chair, Conservative, James Bezan]

Mr. Miller, Mr. Breitkreuz on the same point, not that I see much of a point of order here.

[Larry Miller, Conservative, Bruce—Grey—Owen Sound, ON]

I don't know what Mr. Breitkreuz's is, but my point is that what Mr. Steckle said is exactly what was said yesterday. I agree with you that this is a waste of time dealing with this. If these motions were withdrawn, we could get on to the APF report. In the meantime, if that isn't the will from your side, the motion still deserves merit to be debated and that's what's happening.

[The Chair, Conservative, James Bezan]

Mr. Breitkreuz.

[Garry Breitkreuz, Conservative, Yorkton—Melville, SK]

The APF report is a forward-looking direction that this committee, I understand, wants to take, and the motion we have before us is looking backwards. So it actually contradicts what my colleague across the way has just said. He wants to keep looking back. This committee wants to look forward, so I feel that what he has done has gone a lot farther than these motions do in furthering the purposes of this committee.

[The Chair, Conservative, James Bezan]

No, we discussed this yesterday and we had a motion and we've organized our business....

On a point of order, Mr. Anderson.

[David Anderson, Conservative, Cypress Hills—Grasslands, SK]

I'm willing, if the other side is interested, in making a motion to table this motion so we can move on to the APF.

[Paul Steckle, Liberal, Huron—Bruce, ON]

We agreed yesterday, Mr. Chair.

[David Anderson, Conservative, Cypress Hills—Grasslands, SK]

If Mr. Steckle would go along with that on these two motions, we can move immediately to the APF. We can spend three-quarters of an hour on it today and get moving on it.

So if they have some agreement on the other side that we table the two motions until we're done the APF, I'd be willing to make that motion.

[The Chair, Conservative, James Bezan]

We have a motion on the table from Mr. Anderson.

I can't take a motion like that on a point of order. Sorry.

[Garry Breitkreuz, Conservative, Yorkton—Melville, SK]

Can we get unanimous consent from the other side? It looks like they're agreeing.

[The Chair, Conservative, James Bezan]

There's no unanimous consent.

Mr. Miller, we do have a speakers list here. On the speakers list we have Mr. Easter, then you, Mr. Miller, Mr. Breitkreuz, and then Mr. Hubbard.

Alex, do you want on?

[Alex Atamanenko, NDP, British Columbia Southern Interior, BC]

Well, I was on yesterday—

[The Chair, Conservative, James Bezan]

Every meeting you have to get on again. Do you want back on the speakers list, Mr. Atamanenko?

[Alex Atamanenko, NDP, British Columbia Southern Interior, BC]

I don't have faith in getting....That's okay.

[The Chair, Conservative, James Bezan]

I'll put you on the list, and if we get down to you, Alex, we'll get you there.

Mr. Easter, you're on.

[Wayne Easter, Liberal, Malpeque, PE]

Well, I really had thought that Mr. Devolin was going to be the last speaker and I was just going to sum up on what the motion is all about, so I'll forgo that, Mr. Chair, and ask to be put on later.

I'd just like to make one point first. This motion is not about looking back. This motion is quite simply about trust in government. When government gives its word that there'll be a two-year program that will make a difference in farmers' financial well-being and when farmers are using financial advisers and paying the fees so they could utilize the program, just the same as you do with RRSPs.... You do financial planning using RRSPs. Mr. Miller said earlier, trying to basically leave the impression that people were using the program.... The program is there to utilize. They used it by all legal means. They intended to use it by all legal means, and now it's been withdrawn from them.

The fact of the matter is Mr. Devolin's remarks were not on the topic, Mr. Chair, and he seems to have forgotten that low-income farmers targeted by the Canadian farm families options program are missed in all those proposals he's putting forward. That's all I'll say.

I was going to hopefully close the debate, but I just couldn't resist the urge to make those points, because this is about honesty and trust in government, and farmers have lost trust in this government because they announced a program, then took it away 110 days after the fact.

[The Chair, Conservative, James Bezan]

Thank you, Mr. Easter.

Mr. Miller.

[Larry Miller, Conservative, Bruce—Grey—Owen Sound, ON]

Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Of course I'm going to disagree with Mr. Easter's last comments. This is about going back. Quite often, over the history of time, not just ministers of agriculture, but ministers in all departments get accused, as politicians do, about not listening. Here we've got laid out some happenings that were very clearly.... A decision was made by a minister based on criticism and input, some comments, not just from farm leaders, but from every opposition member or party and certainly from every opposition member on this committee. So the minister reacted to that and went from that.

Now, when this program first came out, being an old skeptic of a farmer.... I guess it's human nature for me. I always have a doubt when I hear about a new government program. Is it going to work? I think there was no doubt, Mr. Chairman, that a certain amount of this money went out from there.

But going back to the criticism, just year-long right up until right before the announcement, I was still getting criticism in my office about this program. Why don't you get that money so that it will get out and do farmers and producers around the country some good?

So on this issue about income tax filing and what have you, I want to make it clear again, I was in no way inferring in my rebuttal of Mr. Easter's comments that farmers were doing something illegal. We know it was within the legal means, but it was Mr. Easter who insinuated--at least I could take that, and I think many could--that they were cooking their books.

We were in the west, I believe, Mr. Chairman, when it was announced that this program was to be phased out over the next year. I know that from that point on, and it was something that I hadn't heard of at the time, many farmers called me to tell me that they were going to rework their income tax and refile it based on that announcement. I know that many have, because they've told me that. And if Mr. Easter's motion was successful, those people there—and I'm sure if it's happened in my riding, it's happened across the country—would be SOL as far as this program. So using that point, we would definitely be going backwards to go back and revisit this.

On another note again—

[A voice]

On a point of order, what's SOL?

[Larry Miller, Conservative, Bruce—Grey—Owen Sound, ON]

Sorry, out of luck.

Programs by government and what have you are laid out there to help farmers and—