Thank you, Mr. Easter.
I firmly believe that the easy way is the best way, at least as a way to start.
I certainly agree wholeheartedly with your point that those public goods that are produced on private land that currently have no market and there is no potential for a market in them and the benefits wholly accrue to the public at large, the public at large, through taxes, should support.
This is the way all other countries do these kinds of programs, including the U.S. And these kinds of programs are part of the U.S. Farm Bill to the tune, right now, of $5 billion per year.
It is our strong view that there are a number of programs that are currently within the Government of Canada and have been there a long time--so I'll get by the issue of partisanship immediately, they've been there for a long time--are not effective and do not deliver environmental results and only serve to alienate rural communities.
I'll be quite specific now. The Species at Risk Act, for example--I think the budget for that is to the tune of $100 million per year, and it's on the agricultural landscape where the Species at Risk Act could and might have the greatest effect. Right now the effect of the current Species at Risk Act, through the regulatory approach, is making landowners very fearful about seeing one of those species on their land.
I think that's an appalling state of affairs. It would be much better for landowners to welcome endangered species on their land. So a redirection of the roughly $100 million that is now being spent on the Species at Risk Act I think could really work.
There are a number of lake cleanup programs, like for Lake Winnipeg and Lake Simcoe, and so on, areas in an agricultural watershed. Those could directly go to farmer payments.
The Tyrchniewicz report estimates a reduction of $61 million in current government payments. That could be directed to farmer payments.
Concerning the current green cover program under a portion of the current environmental pillar of the APF, our estimate is around $78 million. That could be directed to a farmer payment program.
And indeed, under Sustainable Development Technology Canada, there are a number of infrastructure programs designed to help with the provision of clean water. By cleaning water upstream, you don't need water treatment plants. Our estimate is that there is potentially $20 million there.
Our estimate is that there is currently now between $800 million and $900 million of existing environmental expenditures on the agricultural landscape that could be better directed at providing producers with incentives to deliver environmental services.