Agriculture Committee on Feb. 12th, 2009

[The Chair, Conservative, Larry Miller]

You've heard the motion. Is there any discussion?

Mr. Easter.

[Wayne Easter, Liberal, Malpeque, PE]

I don't disagree with the motion, but I believe there are massive changes to the Competition Act in the budget implementation bill that is going ahead right now. It will change the Competition Act substantially when it's voted on today.

I suggest we have somebody come in--not from the Competition Bureau itself--to explain how those changes in the budget implementation act affect the Competition Act. There are a lot of changes there, and I don't understand them all.

[The Chair, Conservative, Larry Miller]

Mr. Easter, I was going to indicate that very thing from the chair. It probably would be part of it, or at least I would presume that. After hearing those changes, the committee always has the discretion on how they want to continue from that, in what direction. It may or may not satisfy the direction that the members here are hoping to go in. On a personal level, I see this competition thing going from the slaughter capacity to the fuel industry to fertilizers. I think there are a lot of things there that affect agriculture.

That said, we have the motion. I have Mr. Eyking next, and then Mr. Atamanenko.

I have Mr. Bellavance in there too. Sorry, André.

[Mark Eyking, Liberal, Sydney—Victoria, NS]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

We'd discussed these motions in committee. I know we have to do one at a time. Maybe they stand on their own, but two of them have a lot of similarities, the ones from Randy and Brian. There was some thinking in our committee that we could do them separately, but they have a lot of similarities and they fall under the same category. It would save us time to do both of them quickly. I think we're on the same track, but it's up to Brian; it's his motion.

[The Chair, Conservative, Larry Miller]

Mr. Bellavance.

[André Bellavance, Bloc, Richmond—Arthabaska, QC]

I agree with what Mark has just said. At the meeting of the steering committee, we discussed Brian and Randy's motions. That is why the first report states that several meetings would deal with competitiveness. It is not as specific as the motions that my colleagues put forward, but the intent was to respond to the two motions requesting meetings dealing specifically with competitiveness. What I am trying to say is that we took your motions into account in our discussions.

I don't know if you are satisfied with our having included them in the first report. It is not as specific as what you were saying. I am not asking you to withdraw your motions but we did already decide that it would be a good idea to discuss this issue.

[The Chair, Conservative, Larry Miller]

Mr. Atamanenko.

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

As a follow-up to what André said, we have four to six meetings devoted to this in what we thought was a logical progression. The key in the motion is “to study”, and that fits in with what we'd planned. I certainly support this motion and the other. If we can pass them, it will give more stimulus to look at competitiveness. I have no problem with that.

[The Chair, Conservative, Larry Miller]

Mr. Storseth.

[Brian Storseth, Conservative, Westlock—St. Paul, AB]

Thank you very much, Mr. Chair. I appreciate my colleagues' support of the motion.

I'd first like to address a couple of things. One is that I'm glad to hear Mr. Easter give our government credit for making changes that we've been calling for for 10 years.

Second, I think they're two very different motions in the sense that mine is going to be very detailed, as Wayne said, very in-depth on the Competition Act. I believe Randy's talking about things like SRMs and some of these regulatory burdens our farmers have been placed with that they're paying for and other farmers aren't necessarily. That's not to put words in Randy's mouth, but I believe that's where he's going. I think those are two significantly different issues, and I think we need to devote time to them both.

The reason I'm moving this forward now is that I'm a little concerned to see this from the report, and that's why I wanted this motion because I wanted you guys to discuss it. We're talking about potentially 15 meetings down the road when we may get to this, if there's not some other issue of the day come up that we're going to want to discuss, or some other estimates, or whatever. You're talking about potentially 20 meetings away. That's 10 weeks; that's a long time. I'm hoping Mr. Easter will support me in moving this forward more quickly. I'm not saying this needs to be at the top of the list, but I would like to see it moved forward more quickly.

I noticed under Mr. Easter's document “Empowering Canadian Farmers in the Marketplace”, July 2005, he has a whole section of recommendations on this that he could really sink his teeth into and look at some of the changes he wasn't able to get done when he was in government.

I would really like to see us move forward with this as quickly as possible. I think these are very serious changes that our farmers have been calling for for a long time.

[The Chair, Conservative, Larry Miller]

Mr. Hoback, and then I'm going to call the question.

[Randy Hoback, Conservative, Prince Albert, SK]

Wayne is actually right. If you have insomnia, read his report and you'll cure your insomnia.

I agree with Brian on the order of precedence. If we look at western Canada, the fertilizer industry might be a good example. It is a question of competition: is there enough competition in that industry? That is a timely question that needs to be answered before guys start planting. That's why I think it needs to move forward.

When I look at regulations, these are things we can do that are not trade compliant. Regulations have no trade implications, other than making sure that we meet the same safety requirements as other countries do.

Again, I think we should attack this altogether very strongly, because whether it's getting into plant breeding or SRMs, as Brian said, these are things that are making our farmers uncompetitive globally. These are things that we're imposing on ourselves, so the quicker we can address these things and try to assist the minister to get them changed, I think our farmers will benefit greatly, not only in the ease of their operations but also in their pocketbooks, which counts the most.

So that's why I'd request that we move these forward. I'd also request that we deal with them separately, because they are separate issues.

But I have another question, Mr. Chair, and I have a notice of motion that I want to present today.

[The Chair, Conservative, Larry Miller]

Yes, the intention is to deal with the motion I have. We're going to deal with the next two motions as well, Mr. Hoback.

[Randy Hoback, Conservative, Prince Albert, SK]

Okay, again, it's something that needs to be addressed in a timely manner.

When something like that comes up, how do we fit it in? That is the question or concern I have.

[The Chair, Conservative, Larry Miller]

I'll call the question.

[Pierre Lemieux, Conservative, Glengarry—Prescott—Russell, ON]

Can you read it again, Chair?

[The Chair, Conservative, Larry Miller]

Okay, you should have it in front of you, but I'll ask clerk to read it again.

[The Clerk]

It's a motion from Mr. Storseth and reads as follows:

That the Standing Committee on Agriculture and Agri-Food conduct a study of the Competition Act and make recommendations on potential changes in light of the global economy and the effect the lack of competition and pricing is having on the farmer’s ability to produce and sell their products.

[Blake Richards, Conservative, Wild Rose, AB]

I have an amendment to the motion I'd like to make before we call the question.

[The Chair, Conservative, Larry Miller]

If so, read your amendment.

[Blake Richards, Conservative, Wild Rose, AB]

Okay, I'll read it with the amendment included: “That the Standing Committee on Agriculture and Agri-Food conduct a study, as our top priority, of the Competition Act”, and then the rest of the motion would remain as it is. So I'm just adding “as our top priority”.

[The Chair, Conservative, Larry Miller]

Okay, that's a technical amendment.

Is everybody clear on the amendment?

[Some hon. members]

No.

[The Chair, Conservative, Larry Miller]

Okay, reread it.

[France Bonsant, Bloc, Compton—Stanstead, QC]

Please read it slowly.