Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.
First of all, I have to say that there was, indeed, a refusal, Mr. Drouin. I have seen the minister's letter indicating that he cannot effectively change the criteria and that we must therefore rely on the decision of La Financière agricole du Québec. In short, Quebec has already said yes. La Financière agricole du Québec said yes. Everyone agrees on the Quebec side. All that's missing is a response from the federal government.
I'm not up on all the details, but I know that the problem we have right now is that the deadline for insurance payments to producers is March 1. So it's urgent. They told us last week at a press conference that they couldn't wait two months. This needs to be resolved as quickly as possible.
I may be interested in knowing what the changes are, but I want to understand why the department refuses to apply them to 2018.
Mr. Drouin, what kind of amendment to the motion would you propose so that we can receive the Minister as quickly as possible?
Unfortunately, when my colleague Bernard Généreux asked the Parliamentary Secretary, Mr. Poissant, in the House, he responded with something that had nothing to do with the situation in Bas-Saint-Laurent. So I'm afraid that this question is being postponed too long, Mr. Drouin, and that no decision is being made.
I commend your open-mindedness, but I want to make sure that we are acting for the right reasons, for the producers. The goal is to convince Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada to change its decision, no matter how. Whether it is by inviting the Minister to appear or by any other way, what matters is making the right decision in this case for all the people who have had to suffer this drought.
I'll come back to Mr. MacGregor's proposal. I think there is room for two meetings. How will we act in the future? Today's weather is no longer what it was when all these programs were created. In a given month, there may be 28 days without precipitation followed by two days of intense rainfall. If we only consider the precipitation received at the end of the month, there will have been the same amount of precipitation as the month before, but the precipitation for the month before will have been better distributed over the period. I think it is appropriate for the committee to look at this.
However, I am once again ready to move forward and discuss with you between now and Thursday, Mr. Drouin, to find a better wording. I hope that we will work in the right direction, that is, for the producers in these regions, including the ones proposed by Mr. MacGregor. I'm being given an opportunity, and I'm grabbing it.