Evidence of meeting #24 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 marketing.
A recording is available from Parliament.
Conservative
Jacques Gourde Conservative Lotbinière—Chutes-de-la-Chaudière, QC
The producers have asked that we include them and that they be partners in setting up [Inaudible- Editor] with them. It's important that they [Inaudible- Editor].
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Gerry Ritz
On a point of clarification, Jacques, are you talking about putting that point in the preamble or somewhere in the motion itself...in points one or two, or are you putting it in the preamble?
Conservative
Conservative
Jacques Gourde Conservative Lotbinière—Chutes-de-la-Chaudière, QC
It says that "the Standing Committee on Agriculture and Agri-food recommend that the government, in conjunction with the producers, consider the advisability of intervening immediately..."
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Gerry Ritz
This is a recommendation to the government that forms the motion as such. Your point is in order, according to the clerk. It's up to the committee as to whether or not they want to accept the amendment.
So the amendment as it stands, then, would interject, “The Standing Committee on Agriculture and Agri-Food, in conjunction with producers, recommend...”. Have I got that right, Jacques? Okay.
You're okay with that friendly amendment, André? Okay.
So the motion, then, has now been amended--a friendly amendment. The mover has accepted it. Do I have a show of hands on the amendment?
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Gerry Ritz
Point number one on André's original motion would now read:
That, given the lifting of the American embargo, except for the regulated area of Saint-Amable, the Standing Committee on Agriculture and Agri-Food, in conjunction with producers, recommend....
So we're adding “in conjunction with producers”, as I understand it. Correct me if I'm wrong.
Liberal
Robert Thibault Liberal West Nova, NS
I don't think that was the intent of the amendment by Mr. Gourde. I think his intention--and I'm asking the question--was that the government, “in conjunction with the producers”....
Conservative
Jacques Gourde Conservative Lotbinière—Chutes-de-la-Chaudière, QC
Yes, that's it, so that the producers not be excluded from the discussion.
Liberal
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Gerry Ritz
So the amendment would then fall in under the third line, “that the government, in conjunction with producers, consider”. Is that where you would insert it, then?
Conservative
James Bezan Conservative Selkirk—Interlake, MB
Would you say “in conjunction” or “in support of”? What would be the proper wording?
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Gerry Ritz
It's Jacques' amendment, so....
Read it as you see it, then, Jacques, so we get it all straight.
Conservative
Jacques Gourde Conservative Lotbinière—Chutes-de-la-Chaudière, QC
The amendment would then read:That, given the lifting of the American embargo, except for the regulated area of Saint-Amable, the Standing Committee on Agriculture and Agri-food recommended that the government, in conjunction with the producers, consider the advisability of instituting a financial aid program specifically for the producers affected by the golden nematode, as existing programs are ineffective.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Gerry Ritz
It would then read:
That, given the lifting of the American embargo, except for the regulated area of Saint-Amable, the Standing Committee on Agriculture and Agri-Food recommend that the government, in cooperation with the affected producers....
Does everybody have it straight?
(Amendment agreed to)
(Motion agreed to [See Minutes of Proceedings])
We will draft the report, André, and stand and deliver it in the House as quickly as possible.
For the second order of business, I will need a motion from the floor to move in camera to continue our discussion on the grain commissions.
Mr. Thibault.
Liberal
Robert Thibault Liberal West Nova, NS
Before we do that, can you tell us why this witness isn't appearing? I was on the health committee for a year and a half and we never had a bureaucrat refuse to appear or not be able to make it, and then at the last minute find out. It seems odd that this year a lot of bureaucrats are not attending committees and presenting themselves as witnesses.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Gerry Ritz
I can't speak to any other committee. Mr. Verheul called and said he was down with the flu today. It's not that he's refusing to come, or whatever. I said jokingly, just bring a note from your doctor and we'll be okay. That's as much as I know.
We will follow it up. We will have Mr. Verheul before this committee.
Are there any other points?
Liberal
Wayne Easter Liberal Malpeque, PE
The three opposition parties presented a motion to the committee some time ago on a recommended witness list. It seems rather strange to me that the organizations and individuals on that list don't seem to be coming forward, but we're continually getting individuals and organizations that weren't on the list. I expect it's at the behest of the government, as it tries to find people out there who want to attack the Wheat Board.
I'm tabling a point at this time that we expect those witness lists to come forward quickly, because it has been dragging on for a number of weeks now.
Second, I do not accept the fact that Howard Migie, whose report was tabled yesterday, will be before this committee for only one hour. That committee has met in secret for a month. It has major implications for the Wheat Board. There are no witness lists attached. In that report there is no indication where they had meetings and with whom. I believe we need him here for two hours; one is just not acceptable. He is a public servant who works for Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada. We should have him here for two hours.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Gerry Ritz
Your point is taken, Mr. Easter. We had fulsome discussions with the steering committee, and then it came to committee of the whole with the steering committee's recommendations, and this is how we set up the calendar.
If you look at today, we had an hour with Steve Verheul and then we had an hour with the Wheat Board witnesses. We also have an hour this afternoon with the minister. But the hour for Mr. Migie was put into the calendar a week or ten days ago. If you want to stretch that to two hours, I don't have a problem with that. We're going to have a problem with the other witnesses who are there for the second hour, unless you want to bring Mr. Migie back for a second hour independent of this, or cancel this hour and go for two hours next week.
What do you have in mind?
Liberal
Wayne Easter Liberal Malpeque, PE
Let's see how he does in the first hour and go to a second later--
Liberal
Wayne Easter Liberal Malpeque, PE
This report has set a new low for task force reports, that's for sure.