Agriculture Committee on May 3rd, 2010

[Greg Devries]

I think trade agreements are good in that they give us market access. We're an export-oriented business. I think the dumping issue is one that always needs to be dealt with. A number of years ago, the corn association went and put an anti-dumping case together. It's very onerous, it's very expensive, and it's producer-driven. They weren't successful. Currently, there is an anti-dumping case taking place against Dutch peppers as well, once again by our producer organization. It's very expensive, very costly, with no given outcome to it at all. Maybe that process should be examined and looked at in terms of how you can make it easier for those affected to use that process at a reduced cost.

[Brian Lewis]

Just very quickly, from the supply management side, it's interesting that right now, just because of our trade agreements, we have to buy 20% of our day-old chicks from the U.S. Putting that into perspective, what you've done is taken the hatcheries here in Ontario—or any province in Canada—and you've suddenly said that 20% of your market is off the table, without question. If you put that back in every person's life, you've effectively said, you're not working a five-day work week any more, you're working four, or instead of making $20 an hour, you're down to $15, or you're down to $10, because of trade agreements.

On the chicken side, we're already allowing in for import 8.5%, and we go to the WTO and everybody is saying you have to increase that. Nobody's even close to that. That's the shame in it all. If the U.S. and the European Union allowed 8.5% free trade, everybody's problems would be solved who think that free trade is the way to prosperity, but there are all these artificial barriers that suddenly pop up.

You can find whatever you'd like, but I think we have to look at what we're giving up and what we're getting. You can be the boy scout all you want, but the fact is, if you come in with another piece of legislation or suddenly you just say we have a homegrown effort, if you have Grow Ontario or Grow Canada, but you really stick to it, your trade agreements won't mean anything. I think we have to be very careful with what we're doing there.

[The Chair, Conservative, Larry Miller]

Thank you, Brian.

We are out of time.

There's just one last thing I'd like to hear a brief comment on. Ms. Bonsant brought it up, and, Marie-Anne, you commented on it. It was about the provinces having the freedom to have some of their own flexibility.

I've been in the beef business and have farmed all my life, and I've always looked jealously towards Alberta and how they supported their beef producers out there, and to the east to Quebec and how they support all their agriculture in general. I don't knock those two provinces for that. I think they're supporting their farmers. But at the end of the day, a national government's role is to look after all of its farmers or people in the same way.

Would you agree with the statement that only a province can offset what another province does? I think you know where I'm going with that.

[Marie-Anne Hendrikx]

I'm just thinking about which hat I'm wearing right now sitting here.

It is true that in the present structure we have, that is the only way it can happen. I really think the federal government needs to support all farmers in ways that make sense.

It doesn't make sense to do per-acre payments. It doesn't make sense to have various programs when you have such a diverse country. I honestly don't know how you deal with the issues of different provinces. Different provinces supporting their producers is one thing. Different provinces supporting them to the level where they're actually driving business out of neighbouring provinces is another issue. I don't know how you referee that, and I don't think constitutionally you can, but I think the federal government has to focus on what it makes sense to do for all producers across the country.

[The Chair, Conservative, Larry Miller]

I agree with that. Whether or not it's done on a per-acre basis, you have to pay a guy with 100 acres in Saskatchewan the same as a guy with 100 acres in Ontario. If you do it on a per-head basis, it's the same thing, and that's ultimately the way it has.... It's always been very disappointing to me, living in Ontario, with half the population of Canada, that we have a government that doesn't ever really support agriculture in the manner that it could. If people are your ability to pay, we certainly have them in Ontario, but it doesn't show.

Anyway, on that note, I'd like to again thank all of you for coming here, for taking the time out of your busy day. It's great to have you. We could have probably spent two more hours here quite easily. The very best to all of you in your operations, and thanks again for being part of our study. Thank you very much.

The meeting is adjourned.