Agriculture Committee on April 11th, 2016

[Jean-Claude Poissant, Liberal, La Prairie, QC]

The discussions have begun, but at this stage, we have to take into account what has happened in the past: on the ground, the Growing Forward safety nets have not benefited producers.

Today, we have an opportunity to change that and give them the support they really need. I am not saying that transportation is not important. However, according to the minister's mandate letter, transportation is important, but safety nets are just as important. The first thing a farm does before planting crops is check whether its income will be secure.

That is why it is very important to study this program and finalize it together to ensure that it will be effective on the ground, as the previous one was not. That is at least what I am hearing.

Producers from the west came to meet with me, as they did with you. They want a safety net, and that is what we should work on.

[Chris Warkentin, Conservative, Grande Prairie—Mackenzie, AB]

I didn't get my answer yet. I'm not talking about the necessity that we all be engaged in how we can build a better Growing Forward 3. I'm asking about a very technical process as it relates to the negotiations. Have we been given a mandate? Are we being invited by the minister to engage in hearings across the country that he will then incorporate into his negotiations—

[Jean-Claude Poissant, Liberal, La Prairie, QC]

That is information—

[Chris Warkentin, Conservative, Grande Prairie—Mackenzie, AB]

Have we been invited by the minister to do this? The parliamentary secretary is the only one at this table who would be able to tell us that.

[Francis Drouin, Liberal, Glengarry—Prescott—Russell, ON]

Actually, the minister said publicly at 1 Wellington that they will be looking at Growing Forward 3, and that he hoped the committee would look at this. Whether we travel or not is up to the committee, not up to the minister.

[Chris Warkentin, Conservative, Grande Prairie—Mackenzie, AB]

We actually have to be officially invited in terms of when the minister would like this report done by. When will he be engaged in those negotiations, when should they be completed, and therefore, when should our work be done? What areas does he specifically want us to concentrate in on?

There is maybe a message coming from the minister now.

[Jean-Claude Poissant, Liberal, La Prairie, QC]

The first meetings with the provinces will be held in July. I think that we have our work to do here.

I have looked at my mandate as parliamentary secretary, and this does not necessarily have to have been included in the programs. As members of this committee, we can propose topics, and since we do not often discuss the safety net, I want the program to be properly fine-tuned.

[Chris Warkentin, Conservative, Grande Prairie—Mackenzie, AB]

Mr. Chair, what would make this side significantly more comfortable is to have an official invite by the minister and then an expectation of what specifically he would like us to undertake, so that we're not just doing busy work.

We want the assurance that we're actually doing something constructive and that the minister then would be willing to take to the table. Frankly, if he's asking us to consult with agricultural experts across the country and farm families across the country, I'm really excited about that if it will improve Growing Forward 3.

But if we are simply engaging in busy work, the first official meetings are in June, but the negotiations have long been started, so the provinces are at the table. They know what they want. The Minister of Agriculture knows what he wants out of this. The finance minister will have said how much money he's going to be allocated.

I would be interested in what specifically the minister is looking at from our committee. If the parliamentary secretary could bring that to this committee, we could then be more comfortable as to what exactly he was looking for from us, and that it's an assurance that it's not simply busy work, but it's actually going to be a constructive supplement to the negotiations.

I'm very happy to be part of that discussion, but I need the assurance from the minister that we're being invited to do this, and that what we find and what we work through will in fact be utilized by the minister to improve the program.

[The Chair, Liberal, Pat Finnigan]

Any other comments before we go to the vote?

[Chris Warkentin, Conservative, Grande Prairie—Mackenzie, AB]

I think time has elapsed, but there are comments to be made.

[The Chair, Liberal, Pat Finnigan]

Are there any other comments?

Mr. Drouin.

[Francis Drouin, Liberal, Glengarry—Prescott—Russell, ON]

I just want to say that we could vote, and by May 2, the parliamentary secretary could perhaps talk to the minister to answer Mr. Warkentin's questions. At the last meeting, the department representatives and even the minister asked us to study Growing Forward 3.

[The Chair, Liberal, Pat Finnigan]

Any other comments?

Mr. Warkentin.

[Chris Warkentin, Conservative, Grande Prairie—Mackenzie, AB]

I'm just not comfortable to proceed to the vote yet.

This came as a surprise when we came to the meeting. The discussions on the table were transportation and TPP, and now we've been brought into....I'm very happy to be a constructive partner in terms of having discussions about Growing Forward 3, but as it stands now, we have no idea what the minister's inviting us to do.

The parliamentary secretary has put it on the record that, in fact, we are being invited by the Minister of Agriculture to be involved in the negotiations or to supplement the negotiation process. I'm very curious as to what that would look like, how that framework...How technically would we be involved, considering the very tight time frames?

If in fact he is, I'd like that in writing, so that committee members can review it before voting on it.

[The Chair, Liberal, Pat Finnigan]

As time has elapsed, we'll have to continue at our next business meeting.

Meeting adjourned.