Evidence of meeting #15 for Agriculture and Agri-Food in the 40th Parliament, 2nd Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was local.
A recording is available from Parliament.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Larry Miller
I call the meeting to order.
We do have some committee business at the start here. In order to be fair to our witnesses, we'll try to get going. We do have to go in camera at some point, for the report.
Mr. Bellavance, at the last meeting you had read your motion in, so I'll turn the floor over to you if you want to speak to it.
Bloc
André Bellavance Bloc Richmond—Arthabaska, QC
I'll be brief, because I had an opportunity to read my motion at the last committee meeting. As I explained then, this is a motion that might serve as a committee report following the meeting we had with potato producers in Saint-Amable, who explained to us that the renewal plan they had been offered, involving $5 million over three years, was clearly insufficient. They have commissioned an independent study showing that they would need 10 years to revitalize their operations. We have to understand that the farmland on which the golden nematode was found is no longer available for potato growing. Moreover, shifting their operations to other crops is complicated. It cannot be done overnight.
So my motion was worded with the intention that the committee report to the government, and recommend the measure set forth in the motion, which I read at the last committee meeting.
Thus, Mr. Chairman, I am now tabling the motion.
Conservative
Conservative
Pierre Lemieux Conservative Glengarry—Prescott—Russell, ON
Mr. Chair, we have an older copy of that motion, I think.
Conservative
Pierre Lemieux Conservative Glengarry—Prescott—Russell, ON
Yes, I would like to discuss the motion, Mr. Chair.
The point I'd like to make again is more procedure-related. We've heard from witnesses. Mr. Bellavance asked us to listen to witnesses on this important matter, and we have. Then they were putting together a report, which has been done. It's a draft report. Has that been circulated? Okay.
The difficulty I have from a procedural point of view is that the motion is in front of the report. It's dictating somewhat what should be in the report before we've had the opportunity as a committee to look at it. The report makes recommendations. The normal process for the committee is to listen to witnesses, have a draft report prepared and circulated to the committee, have the committee review the report, and then when there's disagreement over what the recommendations are, the wording of a particular sentence, or a paragraph that isn't quite appropriate, all this gets worked out as we review the report.
I would say to Mr. Bellavance that rather than using a motion, why don't we review the report? If you want to add these as recommendations, that's why we review the report. It's to figure out whether the recommendations in the draft are appropriate or not, or if we need to add some or take some away. That's the whole process of reviewing the report.
I find the motion is in front of our work of reviewing the report. If we approve the motion, we're agreeing on recommendations before we've even had a chance to discuss the report as a committee. I think it's important. We have members here from all parties. We all listened to the witnesses, and I think we should all have the opportunity to participate in the discussion, review the report together, and work with it as we do with any other report.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Larry Miller
I think your point, Mr. Lemieux, is certainly correct. This is probably a little different from what we normally do. But at the same time, Mr. Bellavance's motion is in order. Unless directed by the committee or whatever, we have to deal with it.
I have Mr. Storseth next, and then I'll come back to you.
Mr. Storseth.
Conservative
Brian Storseth Conservative Westlock—St. Paul, AB
I have two points, Mr. Chair, and the first point would be a question to Mr. Bellavance.
After this motion is dealt with, do you still intend to deal with the report and the recommendations from the report?
My concern is that I have amendments I would like to make to the report as well. We had Quebec farmers here as well as Alberta farmers who had issues with the way potato cyst nematode has been handled. I was hoping to make some recommendations as we traditionally would. I thought Mr. Bellavance would put this in the report as recommendations from the committee and then I would have an opportunity to amend the report as well.
That's my question for Mr. Bellavance.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Larry Miller
There were a couple of questions for Mr. Bellavance.
I'll give you a chance, André, to respond to them if you care to.
Bloc
André Bellavance Bloc Richmond—Arthabaska, QC
I don't want to take up the whole committee meeting with this. I don't have much to add, except that it wouldn't be the first time we would do this. This is not the first time I have done this, at least, and that's why I chose my words carefully. I said that my motion was a suggestion for the report. We could then continue to discuss it.
Personally, as a representative of people who have come before us to discuss their problem, I don't wish their trip to have been for nothing. I want to move forward with the issue by tabling this motion. My reason for doing this is very simple: I am putting their demands directly before the committee. I have put them into a motion. I have the right to do it, and that is how I would like to proceed.
Obviously, if my motion passes, you will all understand that the recommendations in it are those I will want to support in the report. My motion represents the extra weight that I would like to add to the producers' demands. I am therefore asking the committee to either pass or defeat the motion. If members on the government side do not wish to vote and support my motion they are under no obligation to do so. In any case, they have not always voted as I do.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Larry Miller
Thank you.
Next are Mr. Lemieux, Mr. Atamanenko, and Mr. Easter.
Conservative
Pierre Lemieux Conservative Glengarry—Prescott—Russell, ON
I just want to say that Mr. Bellavance has the right to table his motion, but I would like to ask him to withdraw it because, as I already said, it is preceding the report. We have not studied anything relating to the report yet, and Mr. Bellavance is trying to force us into making recommendations.
Conservative
Pierre Lemieux Conservative Glengarry—Prescott—Russell, ON
No, this is a motion, not a suggestion. The motion stipulates that the report must include the three points it sets out.
Bloc
André Bellavance Bloc Richmond—Arthabaska, QC
I am suggesting that the committee adopt these recommendations.
Conservative
Pierre Lemieux Conservative Glengarry—Prescott—Russell, ON
Yes, but if the motion passes, that will have to be done before the report is reviewed. That is where the problem lies. So give us an opportunity to review the report together in committee, and at the end or even during the process, as we discuss recommendations, you can table a motion if necessary. But you may not find it necessary.
Thank you.
Conservative
NDP
Alex Atamanenko NDP British Columbia Southern Interior, BC
I think what is happening is that André is trying to ensure that he gets the best possible deal, the best support for the farmers who were here. If there's a motion in addition to what we're going to be doing in the report, Brian, I would encourage you that there's nothing stopping you from doing the same thing in terms of the Alberta farmers, and we get just a little more reinforcement of what we're trying to do to help these farmers. The same thing that we discussed coming up here could happen. We want to help these guys and we want to do as much as we possibly can to get this issue resolved.
Liberal
Wayne Easter Liberal Malpeque, PE
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
The question is, what stage is the report at? When are we going to deal with it? We are nearing the month of May--
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Larry Miller
Wayne, I could respond to that. We could do the report right now, or at least get started on it. I think the indication was that we would spend the first half hour of this meeting dealing with committee business and then go to our witnesses, so it could be, but we can't deal with it as long as we have a motion on the floor.
Liberal
Wayne Easter Liberal Malpeque, PE
Yes. It would be nice if this could be incorporated in the full report of the committee. I will admit that.
I understand where André is trying to go here, and I've read the minutes of the committee meeting that day. I wasn't able to attend. I think André is trying to give some assurance to those producers in that area, both from a financial point of view over a 10-year transition plan and in terms of forcing the CFIA to do some action plans and timelines in terms of solving the problems. To me that makes a whole lot of sense, so we will be supporting the motion to try to force the government to some action on this issue.
My thought in raising the question earlier on the progress of the report was that if we're dealing with it within a day or two, then maybe it could be incorporated into the full report, but we're not dealing with that as yet.
Conservative