Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
When something is wrong, it's wrong. It's wrong. Why carry on a bunch of debate on an issue when it's very clear that it's not in the best interests of farmers? It's certainly something we've had a lot of debate on in the House. We've had debate here in committee on it, and certainly we've all had an opportunity to hear from farmers, certainly over the summer particularly. We all had a chance to travel in our ridings and other parts of the country.
I very clearly have heard what farmers want to see happen with the bill. They want to see it defeated, and they've made that very clear to me. I know they've made it very clear. Certainly our government has been very clear that we support farmers in that and we want to see this bill defeated. We voted against it, and we've been against it here in committee. Yet, of course, we have the opposition, particularly the Liberals, being quite unclear as to what their intentions are.
Not only has this been a bad bill and one that we don't want to see carried forward, but I think it's also been a waste of the committee's time when we could be dealing with other issues, particularly the future of farming study that we've been doing. I think that's one we need to get back to dealing with, because certainly there are a lot of issues that need to be dealt with out there. I think this bill goes against some of those interests. I don't see the future of farming being furthered by this debate. If anything, this debate does more harm to the industry than anything else that it could be doing.
We heard from young farmers when we were doing our study across the country that they understand where the future is in farming, and certainly a big part of that is research and development and new opportunities. This bill would go a long way to harming those kinds of opportunities for our young farmers.
So it's very clear to me that this bill is one that we want to see defeated, and I think farmers want to see defeated. If that's the case, I see no reason to support this motion to extend the time allotted for the consideration of this bill here at committee or anywhere else.
As I said, if it's wrong, then let's defeat it. I'm prepared to defeat this motion and I'm prepared to defeat this bill today, if given the opportunity. I know farmers would be glad to see that. I know our party would support farmers in that.
When it's creating all this confusion in the industry, it's something that we really need to think about and we really need to try to do our best to deal with it.
If there are calls for further debate, and I've heard that from some of the opposition, I certainly have no desire to see debate stifled by any means. Mr. Hoback and Mr. Valeriote have co-sponsored a motion, clearly a non-partisan type of motion when it's supported by both sides, to study biotech and its implications for the future. I certainly support that, and I think we should be moving forward with something like that without any question. That's something we could be discussing, because it is important for the industry.
In the context of this bill...and from all accounts that I'm hearing from farmers and farm groups, both in my riding and across this country, they are very concerned about the confusion this bill is creating out there. They are very concerned about the uncertainty they're seeing created by this bill. They want to see this bill defeated and off the table. I think we should be doing everything we can to ensure that happens as expeditiously as possible. That's why I will have no support for this motion, and I believe our party doesn't want to see this motion supported. We certainly want to see this bill defeated and we want to see it done as quickly as we possibly can.
It's unfortunate that the Liberals want to try to ride both sides of the fence on this issue, because they could certainly be very helpful in assisting farmers and seeing this off the table as quickly as possible if they would choose, just for once, to take a position on something.
I find it very frustrating when you have individuals here.... Certainly Mr. Valeriote was part of the motion with Mr. Hoback to see the study on biotech, which we all support, yet he represents Guelph, a riding in which we have certainly one of the leading agricultural institutions in the country, and they would certainly not want to see something like this bill move forward there.
It really frustrates me when someone isn't representing the wishes and needs of their constituency. Certainly, to me, that would seem to be the case with this when you have a member representing an institution such as that who would sit here and ride the fence on an issue like this when it would very clearly harm the interests of an institution in his very own riding. Certainly, we need to carry on some debate on the biotech, and that should be done in the context of the motion that Mr. Hoback and Mr. Valeriote put forward, but not with a bill like this one.
The Liberals have kind of said or indicated today for the very first time that they wouldn't support this bill. I have a really tough time trusting them on that. They've been consistently riding the fence on this issue, and I have a really tough time trusting their position, which, for whatever reason, they have now decided to come out with here today.
Certainly in the context, as an example, of the gun registry and the debate on the private member's bill we had there, it was clear that particularly Mr. Easter was not a supporter of the gun registry. And then suddenly he had a conversion. I don't know if it coincided with the fact that his party was being whipped. I have to imagine it was, and I guess he was whipped into it by his leader, but it makes me really question whether we can trust what they're saying here. I would imagine the voters back in the good riding of Malpeque on Prince Edward Island would also have a really tough time trusting that position.
I have some quotes here from Mr. Easter that make it very clear where he claimed to stand on the gun registry, just as we've heard their claims today that they oppose this. I see here from Mr. Easter in November 2009 something that I would say is a very clear indication of where he stands: “I do not favour a gun-control system that makes criminals out of farmers and hunters.” That sounds pretty clear to me, as clear as the kind of statement that we heard earlier.