Evidence of meeting #20 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 point.
A recording is available from Parliament.
Bloc
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Gerry Ritz
Okay. If we're having a recorded vote, I'll read in the motion.
The motion, as it stands, by the Honourable Wayne Easter, Alex Atamanenko, MP, and André Bellavance, MP, reads: “That the Standing Committee on Agriculture and Agri-Food undertake an emergency review on October 24, 25, and 26, 2006, of the Government's actions toward the Canadian Wheat Board.”
(Motion agreed to: yeas 7; nays 4)
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Gerry Ritz
As to the witness list, get your names in as quickly as possible, gentlemen. The clerk will be busy for the next few days lining up everything he can.
André mentioned the Canadian Grain Commission, and Alex said he had a couple more, so they'll have to be added to this. I'm sure the government side will have a witness list as well, if possible.
Conservative
David Anderson Conservative Cypress Hills—Grasslands, SK
Just as a question to André, did he want the Canadian Grain Commission at these hearings, or did he want that separate?
Conservative
David Anderson Conservative Cypress Hills—Grasslands, SK
Okay, but you had also said the Grain Commission earlier. Was that a mistake in translation?
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Gerry Ritz
I had heard the Grain Commission, and I had also heard the grain growers of Quebec. So it's just the grain growers of Quebec.
Anyway, put that in a formal way to the clerk--and Alex, you also, and the gentlemen on the government side as well.
The problem we may have is that we're limited to three meetings by the motion. We had sort of decided at the start of the hearings as to how many witnesses at a table. We may have to expand that, if that's okay.
Good. We've finished with that one.
We're moving on to the motion by Mr. Bellavance. Would you care to speak to it, sir?
Bloc
André Bellavance Bloc Richmond—Arthabaska, QC
In fact, it's a follow-up to the reaction.
The other day, I asked for unanimous consent to hear the potato producers of Saint-Amable on an urgent basis.
I don't want to repeat myself. We know what has happened. The embargo has been lifted and we were the first to welcome that. We're very pleased with that decision. However, you should understand that in the Saint-Amable region, where they had the nematode infestation, producers are left with nothing. We know that the Canadian Agricultural Income Stabilization Program won't be of any help to them.
I have asked for them to appear before the committee on an urgent basis. That's what they asked for in the letter that all the members of the committee have received, I believe. We didn't get unanimous concent because Mr. Gourde believe that it could be detrimental. However, during and after the meeting, we talked to those people and learned that there had been no negotiations at all.
We know that the minister is discussing the situation with his staff, which is quite proper, but I don't see why we couldn't meet with the affected producers. They could come here to tell us about their needs and what they expect from this committee and from this government. They've had to destroy their potato crops and it will be difficult for them to start growing potatoes again for the rest of their lives because of what has happened. You have to understand that.
I think it would be easy for us to spend an hour to listen to them. It's really a very urgent situation. I wouldn't want us to start setting the schedule of the committee with motions -- it may be strange for me to say that since we have two motions to move -- but we don't have any choice. I could not get unanimous consent because Mr. Gourde did not agree at the time even though, as far as I'm concerned, he didn't have any reason to disagree.
We can hear those people even if the government is negotiating with them. After talking to them, I've realized that those negotiations aren't very advanced in any case. So, there's no reason for us not to hear them. If there was a solution and the government had good news to announce, we would be the first to applaud. So, I don't think there's any problem as far as that is concerned.
The reason why I'm moving this motion is that the situation is extremely urgent. This problem has just happened and the producers are in a very difficult situation and want to be heard. I don't see why we would refuse to hear them.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Gerry Ritz
At this point you've given us notice of the motion. Are you're now moving the motion?
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Gerry Ritz
It is seconded by Monsieur Roy.
Is there discussion?
Go ahead, Mr. Miller.
Conservative
Larry Miller Conservative Bruce—Grey—Owen Sound, ON
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
I don't have a problem with the intent here. There was obviously a serious problem. What I'm asking, more than anything, is whether it is still as urgent to have this since the embargo has been lifted, and this kind of thing. I'm just wondering, because of the previous motion that was just dealt with, and the three days. That's a question, more or less, for Mr. Bellavance.
Bloc
André Bellavance Bloc Richmond—Arthabaska, QC
Yes, Larry.
The affected producers are from the Saint-Amable region. The US embargo applied to all the Quebec producers, even to those who had not been affected by the potato cyst nematode. When the two governments came to an agreement and the embargo was lifted, that was perfect for the rest of the Quebec producers because their production could again be sold freely as in the past. However, the Saint-Amable producers are in a dire situation. I'm not saying that there are many of them since there's only about twenty of them who are affected, plus some others who grow other crops and whose land has also been contaminated. At this time, there's nothing for them. They're left with nothing.
At this time, the banks are being patient but you know as well as I do that their patience is limited. Some producers don't even have enough money to buy groceries and so their situation is really extremely urgent and I would like us to give them a hearing.
Conservative
NDP
Alex Atamanenko NDP British Columbia Southern Interior, BC
To add to what André has just said, I believe that the committee giving them a hearing will help the minister when he talks with others and has to make a decision. Hearing a few additional witnesses will increase our knowledge. For this reason, I believe I'm going to second the motion.
Conservative
Jacques Gourde Conservative Lotbinière—Chutes-de-la-Chaudière, QC
I want to tell the members of the committee that we're all very aware of the problems that those producers are facing at this time. It's an extremely rare event.
We're talking about inviting them to come here but I believe we could also travel to their region to see directly what their situation is. We could visit their farms. Here, in this room, we can talk about what changes those producers would have to make. They have machinery and special warehouses for potatoes and they might have to stop this production. I believe that all the members of the committee should go visit their farms. It would then be easier for us and for the government to grasp the extent of the problem. We owe it to them. Together, we could talk to them and get a better assessment of their situation. That would help them. I strongly believe it's out duty to go there. It's a regional problem but, for the government and for all political parties, this would be a historical decision and it would be very important.
That's my suggestion.
Liberal
Wayne Easter Liberal Malpeque, PE
The committee at some future date could in fact do as Mr. Gourde suggests, but at the moment, the bottom line is that for those producers in Quebec, having come through eight or nine years ago, out of the potato region, a problem of a similar type--we were shut out of the market--the problem really is a financial one. That's what it comes down to, at the end of the day. The problem is a financial one.
They don't know what to tell their bankers. They don't know what to tell their creditors. They don't know what is to be made with their crop. They have no idea where the Government of Canada may be going on the issue.
Certainly we should bring them in with some haste. We should hear from them and then make further decisions from there.
Bloc
André Bellavance Bloc Richmond—Arthabaska, QC
I find Mr. Gourde's idea excellent but one doesn't exclude the other.
I tend to agree with Wayne. The committee would only have answered a request from those producers wanting to be heard. I still think they should come here to talk to us. As Alex mentioned, that would help the government to come to a decision. As far as we're concerned, our role would be to help the government to decide. Nothing would prevent us from going there afterwards.
Conservative
Jacques Gourde Conservative Lotbinière—Chutes-de-la-Chaudière, QC
I believe that our committee can travel when this kind of situation happens. Budgets are available for that. We could visit their farms. We could meet on site. I believe we owe it to them.
Bloc
André Bellavance Bloc Richmond—Arthabaska, QC
What's owed to them, I believe, is an answer to their request which was to come here and testify before the committee. The last time we tried to travel, it ended up being a disaster. I believe it would be easier to get them to come here and for us to listen to them. The situation is extremely serious and urgent. However, nothing would prevent us from going to Saint-Amable later on.
For the time being, I ask for a recorded vote on my motion as drafted.