Agriculture Committee on Feb. 10th, 2009

[Wayne Easter, Liberal, Malpeque, PE]

Yes, the minister went to great lengths to talk about how wonderful the program for crop loss damage was for P.E.I. and for Cape Breton and for Peace River. I'll tell you that from the farmer's perspective on the ground, and I'll quote a letter here from the P.E.I. Potato Board, the program was basically an insult: $12.4 million was announced; about $3 million to $3.2 million was spent. I think, on the political side, the minister did a good job in terms of announcing the money. On the expenditure side, in terms of trying to get the money out there, somebody somewhere in the system has made it so restrictive that the money doesn't get to producers.

As an example, one cent per acre is $250. The cost of potatoes per acre--just the cost--is $2,600. We have one farmer who lost $1.4 million worth of potatoes in the field and in storage, and he cannot get any of that money turned over for the storage losses.

Maybe you can get back to me on this. The board says that they were told, “The AgriRecovery only addresses gaps in the federal-provincial suite of BRM programs, but when we identify what we consider to be gaps, we're told by the bureaucracy that they do not qualify”.

We lost potatoes. A program was set up for water-lost crops. It's the same water. It's the same weather that cost them the losses in storage, because they went in wet. So why does the program not qualify for that? You can get back to me on that.

The other question I want a written answer for, if you can get it for me, relates to what David asked earlier. The hog and beef farmers are still suffering, and they've borrowed more money. How much money has actually gone out to farmers, for interest relief or whatever, that doesn't have to be paid back, and how much has the hog and beef farmers' debt load gone up?

Brian, can you get back to us on this as well? There is a real dispute on the number of inspectors--there's no question on that--between us and the government. On these pilot programs--whether they were started by the previous government or this one doesn't matter--can you document the number of hours under those programs that inspectors.... You mentioned that veterinarians need to spend their time on the line. Well, what we're hearing now is that veterinarians are spending their time looking at and auditing paper and driving between plants. Can you get back to this committee with some kind of analysis of the veterinarians' lost time on lines now? Because they're spending the time either being on the road between plants or shuffling paper,while private industry, really, in effect, does the inspections. If you could get back to us on that, it would be great.

Oh, I have one last question. You can't answer right away, I guess. Did the minister say in his presentation that the cost-of-production program is now cancelled? That was a commitment for $100 million per year into the future from the Government of Canada. Are we now hearing that the program has been cancelled, and if so, where has the money gone?

[The Chair, Conservative, Larry Miller]

Sorry, Wayne.

A number of those questions Mr. Easter indicated he'd get in writing. You have just a little over a minute to answer them, and because of some business we have, I would ask you to respect that.

Thank you.

[Greg Meredith]

Mr. Easter, I can begin to address your comments about the potatoes. You're quite right. The AgriRecovery program is part of the integrated BRM suite, so it works in concert with AgriInvest, AgriStability, and AgriInsurance, and fills in gaps. A number of the farmers in the specific case of P.E.I. had access to crop insurance, which would have covered a portion of the value of the lost crop. We did come in and support all farmers with one cent per acre to encourage them to till them back into the field to avoid storage losses, because that was perceived as a genuine gap in the existing programming. We're currently in discussion with P.E.I. about other aspects of AgriRecovery that might be put to use for storage losses right now.

I can address very briefly the issue of hog and livestock numbers. For the 2007-08 AgriStability year, about $1.2 billion was or is being delivered to those sectors across the country. That's in AgriStability payments, not loans.

[Wayne Easter, Liberal, Malpeque, PE]

Go ahead.

[Greg Meredith]

As to loans, more than half a billion dollars in advances went out to the livestock cattle and hog sectors. There are about $450 million in loans still out. A couple of weeks ago the minister declared a stay of default. Under it, the money doesn't have to be repaid for approximately 18 months, until September 2010, and the first $100,000 of any individual borrowing continues to be interest-free.

[The Chair, Conservative, Larry Miller]

Thank you, Mr. Meredith.

I want to thank all of our witnesses for taking the time to come today. As was mentioned, there was a request for some of those answers in writing. Thanks again for being here. I'm sure we'll see you again.

Committee members, we have to move into the actual motions on the estimates. I want to read something here out of chapter 18 under “Financial Procedures”. It says:

A committee may not increase the amount of a Vote, change the destination of a grant or change the destination or purpose of a subsidy, as this would exceed the terms of the royal recommendation and infringe on the financial initiative of the Crown. A committee may move to reduce a Vote by an amount equal to that set aside in the Estimates for a program or activity to which the committee is opposed. Members cannot propose a motion to reduce a Vote by its full amount; the procedure is simply to vote against the question, “Shall the vote carry?”

Now we'll move into our motions.

[Wayne Easter, Liberal, Malpeque, PE]

Do we have a paper with the motions?

[The Chair, Conservative, Larry Miller]

You should have it; it was circulated. Could you show Mr. Easter? I know I got that one and I presumed—

[Wayne Easter, Liberal, Malpeque, PE]

Okay, I have it, if that's the paper. Usually we get the actual motion.

[The Chair, Conservative, Larry Miller]

There's no motion in there. I'm going to be reading the motion. First is vote 1b.

AGRICULTURE AND AGRI-FOOD Department

Vote 1b--Operating expenditures..........$12,673,501

(Vote 1b agreed to)

[Wayne Easter, Liberal, Malpeque, PE]

We think it's not enough, but we'll carry it.

[The Chair, Conservative, Larry Miller]

Next is vote 5b.

AGRICULTURE AND AGRI-FOOD Department

Vote 5b--Capital expenditures..........$20,271,874

(Vote 5b agreed to)

[The Chair, Conservative, Larry Miller]

Now vote 10b.

AGRICULTURE AND AGRI-FOOD Department Vote10b--The grants listed in the Estimates and contributions..........$33,849,600

(Vote 10b agreed to)

[The Chair, Conservative, Larry Miller]

Vote 30b.

AGRICULTURE AND AGRI-FOOD Treasury Board Secretariat Vote 30b--Paylist Requirements, Compensation Adjustments..........$1

(Vote 30b agreed to)

[The Chair, Conservative, Larry Miller]

Shall I report the supplementary estimates B to the House?

[Some hon. members]

Agreed.

[The Chair, Conservative, Larry Miller]

In response to Mr. Easter's questions the other day in regard to our researchers and analysts, I have a letter back from the assistant parliamentary librarian. If it's okay, I'll have the clerk translate it for our meeting on Thursday and distribute it there.

[Wayne Easter, Liberal, Malpeque, PE]

In respect of the letter coming from the Library of Parliament, I would like to see the previous system. I want to know how many managers we had in the old system and how many there are now.

I have a gut feeling that the Library of Parliament is becoming like many bureaucracies in Ottawa—they're losing touch with the very people they're here to assist, which is us. There are more managers entering into the system, and some of those managers are the best researchers in this town. They're put in managerial positions when they really should be doing their work assisting committees.

I raise this in all seriousness. It's not the government that is doing this. I think we have a bureaucracy gone astray, and we need to look at it.

[The Chair, Conservative, Larry Miller]

I think the letter may answer some if not all of your questions, Mr. Easter. I would urge you to sit down with J.-D. or whoever, if you haven't already. I'll leave it at that.

As for business on Thursday, in case you haven't been informed, our intentions are to move right into the report of the subcommittee on agenda that we had last Thursday. We'll go ahead and move into that.

So with no future business, I declare the meeting adjourned.