Thank you, Mr. Chair. I wholeheartedly support Alex's motion.
The reason I asked for a program review at the steering committee meeting and invited the witnesses who we were able to hear from Tuesday—officials from the Ontario-Quebec Grain Farmers' Coalition—is that the programs put in place by the Conservative government do not fulfil certain promises that were made. I am speaking mainly of election promises. I am also talking about the budget, in which they announced a true Agricultural Flexibility Fund. That was not the case because income support was excluded.
You will recall, Mr. Chair, that we heard from numerous witnesses about the Agricultural Flexibility Fund. If I am not mistaken, the first people to talk about it were representatives from the Canadian Federation of Agriculture. If they had copyrighted the name, they would make a lot of money on it. The government talked and talked, but what it finally put in place is not at all what the federation was hoping for.
I can answer the questions put by my Conservative colleagues, Pierre and Randy. Pierre wants to know where the money will come from and is asking Alex what should be cut to find money for the Agricultural Flexibility Fund. It was very clear, not only from the witness testimony, but also from the very beginning. Pierre is certainly no stranger to this. He has to know the answer.
Right now, there is a lot money for ad hoc programs. We will no longer need these ad hoc programs because risk management will be included in the Agricultural Flexibility Fund. It is just a matter of transferring funds, not cutting the funding of other programs or the department's budget.
As for the provinces, I do not think it is a constitutional change. Randy was saying that it would require everyone's permission. Currently, Ontario and Quebec have a farm income stabilization insurance program. With a real Agricultural Flexibility Fund—not the one implemented by the government—provinces would be able to use program funding as needed, for the programs they already have in place. In Quebec, it is a farm income stabilization insurance program. In Ontario, they call it RMP. I think other provinces also have income stabilization programs. For those that do not, it would work the same as other programs. It is always possible to withdraw from one program with compensation or to create a program in order to qualify for the Agricultural Flexibility Fund that would be set up. So that answers the questions that were asked.
Given this clarification, I am certain that we will vote unanimously in favour of Alex's motion.