Thank you, Mr. Chair.
I want to say right from the get-go that we do agree in principle with the motion but there is a “but”. What we don't want to do is double the efforts of the international trade committee. I think that was the reason we did not accept the last motion.
I also want to talk a little bit about the delays and part of the reasons for those. I think it's important to take accountability when there are delays. We could have heard from officials on March 21 if the opposition had not decided to create a voting marathon for 30 hours. We could have done that, but they chose otherwise.
I also want to say that we are extremely focused on that. The minister is focused on it, and the Prime Minister is focused on this issue. I can't talk to what the opposition will do, but I know that last Friday they had some 30-plus questions to ask to the government, and only one question was asked on canola—only one question. I'm not going to answer on the reason for that. They can answer that themselves.
We know, and it is a fact, that CFIA was already in contact, last week, with the Chinese government. It is a fact that CFIA has been in contact with the Chinese government again this week. We know as well—and I think Mr. Hoback mentioned it—that Minister Carr and Minister Bibeau are meeting with the Canadian Canola Growers Association, the Canola Council of Canada, and the Saskatchewan Canola Development Commission today; there are round tables.
Our government is taking this seriously. It is taking this approach, and it is meeting with stakeholders and industry associations that represent farmers. For us to agree to a motion...we're not going to invite the Minister of Agriculture back to this committee simply to say the same things she's going to say at international trade. I know Mr. Hoback is a member of that committee, so he will hear what she has to say at that particular committee. We're not going to invite the Minister of International Trade Diversification either. He's going to appear in front of that committee as well.
I think if we're going to move forward with a motion, we have to be seen to be adding value. I think there is a lot of merit in having industry associations appear in front of this committee. I think we should be inviting officials from CFIA and potentially from Agriculture Canada to ensure that, yes, in case the worst-case scenario happens, we will be there to help them. I know Premier Moe has asked for advance payments for that particular threshold to be lifted. I don't know if that's the answer, but I do want to ask industry representatives about that. I think it's important that this committee find out whether it's the right way forward.
With that I would move an amendment to that particular motion. Before I do, though, I think it's also important that we don't cause fearmongering among other industries. I don't see the particular value of having other commodities appear before this committee. We know for a fact that nothing official has been done to other commodities. I think it's important that we spend our time on canola producers and that we hear, with regard to the notice of non-compliance from China and with regard to canola exports to China.
I think Mr. Berthold has already alluded to this. Obviously the date is going to have to be changed. March 29 is today, and here we are talking about this.
I would move:
That the Committee invite the following witnesses to appear concerning official notices of non-compliance from China for export of Canadian canola seeds:
a. Officials from the Canadian Food Inspection Agency; and
b. Industry Representatives
and that all witnesses appear no later than Friday, April 12, 2019.
We can discuss as soon as possible when we would like to hear from witnesses. It's going to be a matter of who's available as soon as possible.