Agriculture Committee on Oct. 27th, 2009

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

Yes. Do not be intimidated by that.

[The Chair, Conservative, Larry Miller]

Carry on, Mr. Lemieux.

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

Thank you, Chair.

As a committee, we've done excellent work on competition. It covers a wide breadth. We've had a lot of different witnesses and I think we have some good recommendations to make.

There are two things we have to decide. First, where do we start winding it up? Are GMOs in the report, or is that something different? Second, I want to make sure we put aside enough time to do a good job on this report. In general, I find this committee works well together, but we don't leave enough time for committee business. It's always crammed in there and we're always running out of time.

With respect to this report, we're talking about a year's worth of testimony. We started this quite some time ago, which is good. However, we should make sure that we take sufficient time to review the report—not just the words and commas, but the content and recommendations. Farmers, groups, and associations are going to be looking at this report, and they'll want to know that we heard them, understood them, and made valid recommendations.

I'm of the opinion that we need two meetings. And if we feel we need more, then maybe we should have a third meeting. This is a big report, a year's worth of investment on behalf of this committee and all of its members.

I think we should schedule this for release before Christmas. We've devoted a lot of time to this study, we're going to do a report, and we should get it done before Christmas.

[The Chair, Conservative, Larry Miller]

There's a clear intent.

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

I think you're right. I want to make sure that we don't start putting too many other things in the way. We say we're stopping our witnesses so we can focus on the report. So we shouldn't flood the calendar with all sorts of other projects that we want to get moving on before we finish our report. I'd like to see our consideration of the draft report moving forward into early November, rather than moving later when we're under the gun and we have to do a rush job.

Right now, we're having a meeting on the hog and pork sectors. Then there's a meeting on SRM and COOL. Then we have program review. Finally, after all that, we'll be getting around to the report. I think the report should move forward. It should be moved to earlier in November so that we don't launch a whole new activity, listen to new witnesses, and come up with new recommendations for a potential second or third report before we've even done our major report.

I'd like to see our competitiveness report, the review of it, moved up so that we don't get distracted. I'd like us to finish by focusing on that report and doing a good job of it. Since this is going to take time and effort, we should move it up.

[The Chair, Conservative, Larry Miller]

Next Tuesday and Thursday are set. Then we have the break week.

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

Then we come back.

[The Chair, Conservative, Larry Miller]

The only opportunity we have to move it up is from November 17 to 19.

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

I propose we do that.

[The Chair, Conservative, Larry Miller]

I can't be here that day. I would have liked to be part of it, but I can have a substitute come in.

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

I recommend November 17 and 19, so that we're moving this up without moving into other areas prematurely. Our recommendation should read that we modify this report and study it on November 17 and 19. I'm not suggesting that anything else get removed. I'm just saying that it's a question of order.

[The Chair, Conservative, Larry Miller]

Mr. Storseth, and then Mr. Easter.

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

I think the parliamentary secretary makes a valid point. We spent a significant amount of time on this. The sooner we can get this out, the sooner we can put pressure on the minister to act on some of the recommendations.

I would like to address Mr. Valeriote's point on GMO. If we deal with it only in the report itself, we'll be going line by line. It'll be one thing that we talk about in the report, we'll have a vote, and that'll be it. If we had it as a specific issue, we could have a meeting with witnesses. It could be its own issue. It's a significant issue that we should all take time to look at. It's going to involve the future of agriculture. I think this is the way we should go.

[The Chair, Conservative, Larry Miller]

Mr. Easter.

[Wayne Easter, Liberal, Malpeque, PE]

Thanks, Mr. Chair.

The steering committee spent a lot of time on this. I would rather stick with that. Against the rules--the motion of the committee--I understand the parliamentary secretary was at the steering committee meeting as well.

I am really surprised at the concern I'm hearing now, because there was the opportunity to have meetings early on, where we could have used time to good advantage. Members walked out, so the government caused this committee to lose a lot of time. Let's be direct here.

Mr. Chair, I'm just saying I think the schedule is a reasonably good one. I do think you need to be in the chair when we're dealing with that committee report. And let's go with what the steering committee spent a lot of time putting together. That's why you're a steering committee.

[The Chair, Conservative, Larry Miller]

Okay.

Mr. Eyking.

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

I kind of agree with Wayne, unless I sense that there's going—

[An hon. member]

Kind of agree?

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

Unless I sense from Mr. Lemieux that there's going to be a lot of disagreement during this report. If there's not, I can't see why we can't peel this off in two days.

If we can finally have this committee working together on an issue.... And I'd like to see the chair in place, because I've seen some shenanigans before when the chair has left. Especially with a report this important, I think we've got to make sure all hands are on deck.

I hope we don't have to bring this to a vote. I think the steering committee has laid out a good agenda and we should stick with it.

[The Chair, Conservative, Larry Miller]

Mr. Bellavance.

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

Mr. Chair, generally, at the Standing Committee on Agriculture and Agri-Food, we have always managed to “chew gum and walk at the same time”. Contrary to Mr. Lemieux, who says that we must deal only with the report, that we must set much time aside for the report, and that we could discuss less important subjects from time to time, I do not think that this kind of topic was ever discussed by the steering committee. On the contrary, these topics are...

I often repeat this because I believe that some members think that we come up with ideas out of nowhere, because we feel like discussing them or because we thought about them during the night. But that is not the case. It's because we have discussed things with farm producers, people from the agricultural environment, who told every one of us that they would like to discuss such and such a topic. This is the reason why we are submitting them. I think that we can do both at the same time.

The idea of providing for extra hearings, just in case the report needed more time for discussion, was because we wanted some flexibility. I believe that we will be able to make progress and maintain our schedule for the report along with the work agenda. We always try to plan for some flexibility so that the work can go forward, that's certain.

[The Chair, Conservative, Larry Miller]

Thank you, Mr. Bellavance.

Mr. Shipley.

[Bev Shipley, Conservative, Lambton—Kent—Middlesex, ON]

There seemed to be some resistance to change--just as long as we have some flexibility.

I don't know the length of it, but from all discussions it's fairly lengthy and it'll be a fairly comprehensive report. If there seems to be a big concern that the chair needs to be here, that's fine, as long as we have some flexibility at the end.

So we have November 19, the 24th, and then on November 26 it would seem we have another, similar discussion that we'll follow up on after November 17 on the program review.

And should there be something, Mr. Chair, in terms of finishing the conclusions, or I don't know what--all I'm asking is that there be flexibility on this thing. I think you talked about having ministry people come in, and they're fairly flexible in terms of being able to move ahead and work on it on November 26, just to get it done.

I'm hoping it doesn't. The food safety one, a pretty comprehensive report, went really well, except for the end. But in saying that, that's okay, we went through it well. I'm hoping this will too. It's just that if the concern is that the chair be here, as Mr. Eyking has said, that's fair--as long as we can have some flexibility around November 26, just in case. So I'm hoping this might be an option.

[The Chair, Conservative, Larry Miller]

Okay. We're going to wrap up the discussion.

I have just one comment, which I hope you will allow me as a member of the steering committee. I did have an objection, not to discussing GMOs but to the timing of discussing GMOs. I think it's another issue on its own. The reason I have a problem with it at this point is that we made a decision back in the spring, as a committee, as a whole—I believe it was unanimous—to get into the future of farming. All I'm asking is if we could just have something friendly recorded that immediately after this we do move into future farming. I think it's very important. I stressed this at the steering committee, how I'd like to have at least one or two meetings on it before we break at Christmas, to send a signal to young farmers across the country that we are serious about looking at this. I ask that basically as a consensus, a commitment, that immediately after what we have got in this report we could move into that.

Is there any comment or dissension on that?

[Some hon. members]

No.