Thank you, Mr. Chair.
If anything, Mr. Chair, I think we heard the sense of urgency associated with the request by the producers and processors who appeared before us. I think it's with that same sense of urgency that we have to address this motion.
There's nothing in the motion that states that it has to be that amount of money on an ongoing basis. We considered other options at that meeting, including the creation—I think everybody nodded their heads in agreement—of cogeneration plants beside processing plants so that we could use the SRMs for other purposes. We know that it will take a long time.
In the meantime, while there is merit in what Mr. Lemieux said about opening markets, we also know that it will take a long time to open those markets. If the government is making efforts to open markets for beef producers, that's a good thing. But my suspicion is that if it takes as long to open more markets for beef as it has for pork, we will lose a lot of livelihoods in the beef industry.
Mr. Chair, you yourself saw the facial expressions of people who were losing their livelihoods when they appeared before this committee. I think it is the intent of Mr. Bellavance's motion that this urgent situation be addressed now rather than later. It doesn't supersede the opportunity for any committee to come together and consider other solutions in the meantime.
I'm not in favour of paying $31.70 per head on an ongoing, indefinite basis any more than the government is. Having said that, I think at this point in time that urgency has to be addressed. This is a wonderful stopgap measure, Mr. Chair, and I would hope that people would see it as that, as a stopgap, temporary measure, until those other solutions are developed.
Frankly, when it comes to deploying the money properly, I've heard, for as long I've been here--that's a year--how wonderful this government is at deploying money and making sure it gets into the right hands.