Evidence of meeting #13 for Agriculture and Agri-Food in the 42nd Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was paca.
A recording is available from Parliament.
3:30 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Pat Finnigan
Order, please.
Welcome, everyone, to our meeting of the Standing Committee on Agriculture and Agri-Food.
Go ahead, Mr. Vaughn.
3:30 p.m.
Liberal
Adam Vaughan Liberal Spadina—Fort York, ON
I'd like to move and table the motion of colleague Alaina Lockhart, the MP for Fundy Royal, that the committee recommend to the House the following:
That the House recognizes that the government strongly supports supply management, dairy producers, and the Canadian dairy industry; and, consequently, the House urges the government to:
(a) recognize the magnitude of the economic losses to Canadian dairy producers from the importation of diafiltered milk, which has increased significantly over the last few years;
(b) recognize that the industry call for the problem to be resolved rapidly;
(c) to meet with dairy producers and Canadian dairy industry, within the next 30 days, in order to address the immediate impact of the economic losses cause by the importation of diafiltered milk, and to propose a sustainable solution toward modernizing the dairy industry,
AND THAT the Chair report this to the House of Commons at the earliest opportunity.
3:30 p.m.
Liberal
3:30 p.m.
NDP
Ruth Ellen Brosseau NDP Berthier—Maskinongé, QC
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
I want to thank Mr. Vaughan for finally having introduced Ms. Lockhart's motion. I don't know if you know this, Mr. Chair, but I too submitted a similar motion. Is the member ready to accept an amendment?
A few days ago, the minister announced that he would be voting against the NDP motion, and a certain number of days have passed since then.
The minister went down to the lobby and said that he was going to be voting against the NDP motion, announcing that there would be consultation for the next 30 days. We've gone through quite a few days, and there are 18 days days left for consultation. Would you be open to amending the motion? Time has passed since the government announced consultations, and there are only 18 days left. We all acknowledge the urgency of action on diafiltered milk.
3:30 p.m.
Liberal
3:30 p.m.
NDP
Ruth Ellen Brosseau NDP Berthier—Maskinongé, QC
It's just in order to solve the problem within the next 18 days. It is:
That the motion be amended by replacing the word “ thirty (30) ” with the word “eighteen (18)”.
3:30 p.m.
Liberal
3:30 p.m.
Conservative
Chris Warkentin Conservative Grande Prairie—Mackenzie, AB
I wonder if the government could explain what they expect the outcome to be, what they are committing the minister to do. They are responding to calls from the NDP motion on their opposition day to resolve this issue. There was some stronger language from the NDP in the type of solution that would come forward.
There is a commitment to meet. I think we would like to include in the motion that the minister come to our committee to explain the outcome of those hearings and what he intends to do in 18 days.
That would be the action item. Otherwise, I'm not sure why our committee's getting involved.
3:30 p.m.
Conservative
Chris Warkentin Conservative Grande Prairie—Mackenzie, AB
I would like to ask if the government would be willing to include an amendment that the minister would come to the committee to explain his findings and to tell the committee what he intends to do.
Otherwise, I'm not sure why the committee is involving itself in something that is completely in the minister's bailiwick. There really is no reason that we would be telling the minister what to do unless this committee intends to do something, namely, to involve ourselves in the process.
3:30 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Pat Finnigan
Do we support the amendment to the amendment? That is the question.
Are there any questions?
3:35 p.m.
Conservative
Chris Warkentin Conservative Grande Prairie—Mackenzie, AB
I don't want to be unreasonable about the time frame, but it would be important for our committee to close the circle on this. This matter is completely within the minister's mandate and is outside the committee's mandate. I'm not sure why we, as a committee, are doing anything on this unless we are going to ask that the minister come to the committee to explain the findings and make a commitment with respect to what he's going to do to resolve this issue. Otherwise, this is simply window dressing, and this committee has no need to be involved. The minister could go out and announce that he is going to do this without the committee's involvement. The only reason we would move a motion would be if we intended to do something on this issue.
I'm simply suggesting that we invite the minister to the committee, after the hearings, to explain what he heard and tell us what he intends to do.
3:35 p.m.
NDP
Ruth Ellen Brosseau NDP Berthier—Maskinongé, QC
Thank you.
I think it's really important that the minister does come before committee to talk about what he's heard from the industry, from dairy producers. We did have that debate in the House, and sadly, the motion did not pass. I just want to make sure that the government and the minister really do understand the situation and that he is able to resolve it. We thought the solution was fairly simple, to just apply the rules already in place, but through questioning and whatnot in the House, it seems to be a little bit more complicated.
He doesn't seem to get how to resolve it. I think it is really important that he come before committee and explain the action that is being taken after the 18 days.
3:35 p.m.
Conservative
Bev Shipley Conservative Lambton—Kent—Middlesex, ON
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
I appreciate the government taking the position to help out here.
Following on what both my colleagues have said, if we don't have the minister here, it's an announcement, really. It's saying that the House recognizes the industry, the call for the problem to get resolved and to meet with the producers. I have a sense from the discussions the minister has had—and I appreciate the fact that he has been out talking, too—that he's been briefed on the whole issue of diafiltered milk and has met with a number of the dairy producers, so I'm convinced by his actions that the 18 days is not the issue. I think the issue would be not having come to this committee. That would be an issue, I think.
If it just became an announcement to meet and not do anything, we're going to break before we would hear it as an announcement, rather than coming as something from this committee. We've all agreed on the significance that it has to this industry, not only to the producers but also on the processing side, so I would support that.
I'm seeing some nods, so I think you could request it and it would happen. I think everyone, not just in this committee but on the dairy and the processing side, really needs to hear from the minister, and I'm almost convinced that he's prepared to do that because he's had some ongoing consultations.
3:35 p.m.
Liberal
Adam Vaughan Liberal Spadina—Fort York, ON
We're prepared to entertain the amendment insofar as it states “at his earliest convenience”. It's hard to put an exact timetable to it just because of his schedule, so we'll accept that amendment that the minister be invited to appear “at his earliest convenience” to update the committee if we can call the question now.
3:35 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Pat Finnigan
I guess the amendment is “that the minister appear in front of the committee at his earliest convenience”.
Mr. Shipley.
3:35 p.m.
Conservative
Bev Shipley Conservative Lambton—Kent—Middlesex, ON
I'm just wondering, with that, which is pretty open-ended, if the committee would be able to come back on Wednesday and inform us of what that “earliest convenience” might be, just so that we know. This is the time of the year when some committees get interrupted by votes.
