Evidence of meeting #45 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 report.
A recording is available from Parliament.
4:55 p.m.
Conservative
4:55 p.m.
Conservative
Pierre Lemieux Conservative Glengarry—Prescott—Russell, ON
We have the article, Wayne. Read the whole thing, Wayne.
4:55 p.m.
Liberal
Wayne Easter Liberal Malpeque, PE
It is just so much of what this government does, what these members do all the time in the personal, vindictive attacks they have against me--but that's fine. They quote partial quotes in terms of their attack. The agriculture industry will tell you behind closed doors, Mr. Chair, that the reason they won't get into it is the fear and intimidation tactics of the minister. That's the reality, and those are the facts we're looking at.
4:55 p.m.
Some hon. members
[Inaudible--Editor]
4:55 p.m.
Liberal
Wayne Easter Liberal Malpeque, PE
Let's just be honest about it, Mr. Chair. This is a government that operates on intimidation.
4:55 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Larry Miller
Order, please.
As Mr. Hawn so eloquently said, I believe it was in the House yesterday, let's not try to pick fly specks out of pepper. I can tell you that I haven't been in your riding, Mr. Easter, but you've been in mine and numerous others. As far as personal attacks, I think it's all around the table.
Let's get back to...
Do you have a point of order, Mr. Eyking?
4:55 p.m.
Liberal
Mark Eyking Liberal Sydney—Victoria, NS
On a point of order, I've mentioned many times how long I've been here, and many of you have been here shorter or longer than I have, but I find the House of Commons question period and maybe ten percenters are the places to take shots at each other, but not in committee. We have to keep this committee on track. We can debate issues. I've seen a shot taken at Alex one day in here, and I've seen the second shot. If we as a committee start going after personal things about what's happening in our ridings or in our families, there's no end to it.
4:55 p.m.
Liberal
Mark Eyking Liberal Sydney—Victoria, NS
I think we should keep the personal stuff out of this, because I've never seen this in a committee before.
4:55 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Larry Miller
I couldn't agree with you more, Mr. Eyking.
On a point of order.
4:55 p.m.
Conservative
Brian Storseth Conservative Westlock—St. Paul, AB
Mr. Chairman, I'd like him to table the document he's selectively quoting from.
4:55 p.m.
Conservative
4:55 p.m.
Conservative
4:55 p.m.
Liberal
4:55 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Larry Miller
Not right now, but I'm sure she could.
Anyway, I'm going to call the question on Mr. Bellavance's motion.
4:55 p.m.
Conservative
4:55 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Larry Miller
Mr. Lemieux requested a recorded vote. I'll have Madam Clerk call the vote.
4:55 p.m.
Conservative
Randy Hoback Conservative Prince Albert, SK
This is the question on bringing it forward, correct? It's not a vote on the motion itself.
4:55 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Larry Miller
Debate on the motion itself will come.
Madam Clerk will call the vote.
(Motion agreed to: yeas 6; nays 5)
Is there debate on the motion?
Go ahead, Monsieur Lemieux.
4:55 p.m.
Conservative
Pierre Lemieux Conservative Glengarry—Prescott—Russell, ON
I want to say, Chair, that I'm disappointed that we've blown another meeting by going in circles on motions. The report sits here unfinished. I think it's worth reiterating that we in fact already voted on a very similar motion, Chair. It was my motion to seek different solutions, which I put forward in front of committee a number of meetings ago.
I still haven't heard why Mr. Bellavance feels so strongly that this is the only solution. Actually, I would put a question to him, through you, Chair. Does he feel that there are any other possible solutions to the SRM irritants, and if there are other solutions, why are they not included in his motion? Why is his motion so narrow? Particularly given the track record of the last time an undertaking like this was attempted, by the previous Liberal government, and the results of that undertaking, why is his motion so narrow?
4:55 p.m.
Conservative
4:55 p.m.
Bloc
André Bellavance Bloc Richmond—Arthabaska, QC
Of course, very quickly, because I would like us to vote. As I have said a number of times, the motion indicates to the government that there could be other solutions. This is why I voted for Mr. Lemieux's motion. It was very open-ended, although I found it too weak.
Other questions and comments emerged earlier in the discussion. We might even say falsehoods, when it comes to members of the Conservative Party. They said that agricultural producers are not asking for this. That is completely false. Mr. Dessureault, the chairman of the Fédération des producteurs de bovins du Québec, is a producer. He has appeared before us more than once.
My mike was not on, of course, but I was saying to Randy earlier that the SRM standards were put in place two years ago, and, for two years, cattle producers have been asking us for assistance with them. I was in favour of Mr. Lemieux's motion when it mentioned the discussions that should take place between the government and cattle producers.
My motion does not come out of thin air; nor is it something that came to me during one of my restless nights. It comes right from the producers and from the industry as a whole. As Wayne said earlier, the cattle industry was unanimous on the motion. The only opposition, unfortunately, is the governing party.