Agriculture Committee on April 25th, 2007

[Larry Miller, Conservative, Bruce—Grey—Owen Sound, ON]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Gentlemen, thank you very much for coming here today, and for your comments.

Something needs to be said. Usually this committee is very, very non-partisan; we leave that partisan politics out of it. I regret that I have to use some of my time here, because it's limited, to straighten out something Mr. Easter said.

I want to make it very, very clear to all of you that the Wheat Board is an issue that was very fragmented out west among the producers themselves. They want some change in it, and they've indicated that.

Mr. Lemieux, I would take it, just by the nod of your head, that the maple syrup producers are in no way asking for anything different from what they have. Would that be a true statement? They want to continue selling the way they are in a group. Is that fair, yes or no?

[Pierre Lemieux]

In Quebec, yes, it's because we want—

[Larry Miller, Conservative, Bruce—Grey—Owen Sound, ON]

Sir, I don't want to waste time. Could I have a yes or no?

[Pierre Lemieux]

Yes.

[Larry Miller, Conservative, Bruce—Grey—Owen Sound, ON]

Yes. Okay.

And it's the same thing in the supply management industry. It is consolidated. Everybody wants—

[Pierre Lemieux]

No.

[Larry Miller, Conservative, Bruce—Grey—Owen Sound, ON]

I just want to make this point. It is never going to happen in those industries unless the producers themselves want it.

I'm a beef farmer, but I also was in the supply-managed industry. I milked cows. I know what's there, and I know what the feeling is. Marketing boards are run by the provinces. They're provincial. The federal government is not going to get in there, I can tell you that. I needed to clarify that.

Getting on to some of the points, and there was—

[Wayne Easter, Liberal, Malpeque, PE]

It isn't fair to force these individuals to say “yes” or “no”. The fact of the matter is that if one producer wants choice, under your proposal the government would have to allow it.

[The Chair, Conservative, James Bezan]

It's Mr. Miller's time.

Larry, please continue.

[Larry Miller, Conservative, Bruce—Grey—Owen Sound, ON]

It's unfortunate that we had to spend time straightening out something that Mr. Easter brought up.

Mr. Martin, I was really interested in your comments about helping young farmers. It's a problem across the country. One thing is the amount of capital out there.

I understand the lower interest rates and trying to give some breaks there, but there's something I need to have clear in my mind. On this average farm price—you put it at roughly $1 million—is that in every sector? Let's say it's a dairy farm—and I know there's a lot of dairy here in Quebec—is it because of the added quota cost? For example, if a guy were going into pork or beef or whatever and didn't have a quota, is it still the same? Does that affect that average price? Is the main cost in there when it comes to purchasing a farm taking up the quota?

[The Chair, Conservative, James Bezan]

You may go ahead.

[Benoit Martin]

We can definitely attribute a certain part of the harm to quotas. It's forced up the price of farms in recent years; that's true. However, supply management is a system that enables producers to market milk and to have income security. It's a system that's worth something for producers, but also for the government and the Canadian population. The fact that citizens don't have to pay tax to support the system has a certain value, I believe. Producers have definitely invested in it, and the price has risen, which has also forced up the price of businesses. In Quebec, we recently made the decision to cap quota prices to prevent speculation. Within three years, I believe, the price will fall to $25,000, which is fair and very reasonable. I don't believe it's really the system that's forced up the price of land and quotas. Instead I think that's more attributable to the fact that there's little revenue in the businesses. Back home, we had little income, so we tried to grow the businesses; we tried to buy out the neighbour. That's the way it was virtually everywhere because our farm incomes no longer gave us a decent living. Net business income was very low.

[Larry Miller, Conservative, Bruce—Grey—Owen Sound, ON]

I wasn't in any way inferring that the cost of the quota was a bad thing. I support supply management; it's looking after itself.

Going further, you talked about that hands-on training. I was the same. I farmed with my dad for the first few years. It helps. You can share equipment, do a number of things. On the training, other than supporting agriculture college and that kind of thing, what exactly would you like to see government put in there to help young farmers?

[Benoit Martin]

Jean-Philippe, who is with me, sits at a table on training. He's really our federation's specialist in the field. I could ask him to answer that question.

[Jean-Philippe Deschênes-Gilbert, Secretary, Fédération de la relève agricole du Québec]

With regard to training, we realize that, when we talk about farm transfers, human relations are one of the main reasons why a transfer can work or fail. So we think there should be an investment in human relations training. You've seen it, you no doubt had good discussions with your father at the time the farm was transferred. You didn't necessarily have the same vision of the business. We think there should be an investment in human relations training within teams that do a farm transfer.

[The Chair, Conservative, James Bezan]

Mr. Hubbard.

[Charles Hubbard, Liberal, Miramichi, NB]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

It's certainly good to be here in Quebec this morning.

The gentleman sitting beside the chairman, Mr. Fréchette, has of course had a long connection in his family with agriculture in Quebec. When we work as a committee, we hear all kinds of things, and then we go back to Ottawa and somebody makes a nice report and tries to indicate what we have heard and what we might suggest. I know that although he may be very quiet and taking notes this morning, it's very important for you and for us to get on record what is so significant for agriculture in Canada, and especially here, in the province of Quebec.

It's a matter of looking at some key words. We have talked about “innovation” and about “research” and about “succession”. All of these are very significant. But Maurice, you speak of the WTO, and basically we think of political power. That's one of the major problems in our country and probably around the world: do farmers and agricultural groups have enough political influence?

When you go to the WTO, maybe you meet with the European Union group. The farmers from France are a big factor in how the EU looks at agriculture. I might ask this question, then, to members here: do you feel, as farmers—?

We heard this morning that 45% of the farmers in Quebec have to get off-farm income in order to maintain their families. That's a rather disastrous fact, Mr. Chair, and this grows. Take New England fifty years ago. People from my own province moved into New England to farm, and within a very short time they were farming on the weekend. They couldn't support their farms and their families without off-farm income.

So let me ask this question. Do you have enough political influence? In Quebec we probably have the strongest connection between government and agriculture of any province in this country; maybe Alberta is second. In terms of what you might say to this committee, do you have enough influence on your politicians and on your political leaders to get the things you need in order to have a successful agricultural economy?

Maurice is just waiting for that question, I know.

[The Chair, Conservative, James Bezan]

Mr. Vigneault.

[Maurice Vigneault]

It's a matter of appreciation. I believe we have a fair bit of political influence in agriculture. I don't want to be pretentious. This concept of food sovereignty, which we were talking about earlier, is one in which each of the products or each of the regions of the world should first be able to be self-sufficient and where there would be a surplus market and a regional market that is deficient in a given type of production. This concept is relatively easy to sell in the global agricultural world. Marketing organization is also relatively easy to sell. It doesn't necessarily have to be a copy of what's being done in Quebec, but a form of market organization, the provision of products to the local consumer is being developed in all kinds of countries. UPADI has gone to prepare work sites, projects in Latin America and Africa, and has had good success in organizing local marketing.

So I think that, despite the fact that we are a small number of agricultural producers relative to the total number of producers in the world, our organization nevertheless has fairly good political influence outside our borders. If that was the question, the answer is yes.

[Charles Hubbard, Liberal, Miramichi, NB]

Secondly, we've heard that the CAIS program is a good program, but it's probably too complicated and maybe doesn't meet the needs of the diverse farmers here in Quebec. Is that a proper statement?

[Maurice Vigneault]

The program's core principles are valid. They're based on the overall income of the business. Improvements have already been made to the program, including the 15% invested in the farm. That was announced last winter or spring. However, improvements remain to be made. The program's response time is too long. Too much time elapses between the moment the producer is dealing with the problem and the moment he receives assistance in order to solve it.

Changes should be made so that it is more compatible with our provincial programs. It's also too complicated. The documentation is really very complex. So we're talking about making this program more accessible to producers, making it more flexible so that it's consistent with our provincial programs and making its response time shorter.Iit isn't a bad fund. However, a larger number of improvements have to be made to it.

[The Chair, Conservative, James Bezan]

Thank you very much.

[Pierre Lemieux]

It should be based on producers' production costs rather than on [Inaudible - Editor]. That's where the main problem is.

[The Chair, Conservative, James Bezan]

Mr. Bellavance.

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

Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Thank you for being here with us this morning. This is quite an interesting day, in that it's enabled us to meet the producers in their environment and to hear their concerns about the new Agricultural Policy Framework and risk management, a concern for many agricultural producers.

Mr. Lemieux, I'd like to start with you because I got the impression earlier that we were forcing you to answer yes or no. Perhaps you intended to elaborate a little more on your answer concerning supply management and collective marketing. I'd like you to tell us your opinion the way you would have liked to do it.