Absolutely. I don't think it's imagining anything to know how many farmers on the ground would have wanted their voices to be heard here today, or tomorrow, or the day after.
My next question is about your first section here that refers to access to elevators, rail, and ports. Having read the section, I don't actually see any reference to ports. As the MP for Churchill, I'm particularly concerned about what the loss of the Wheat Board will mean to Churchill. I think we all know it well, sitting around this table--that with the loss of the Wheat Board, the potential loss of 95% of what goes through the port of Churchill, no small number by any means, spells real danger for the community that depends on the work of people working at the port, certainly those who work on the rail lines that connect to the port.
Not only is there no reference to the impact on ports per se.... I see quite a bit of reference to elevators and rail. At the end, the committee points out that its issues to be addressed by the working group involved looking at access to ports. How is it that you were supposed to be looking at that, yet there is no reference to it? What we do know is that Churchill will be adversely affected.
If I can add to that, what concerns me here is that there is reference to the potential trouble with government intervention. What we do know is that the Conservative government has with great pomp and circumstance announced a $5 million investment in the port of Churchill, which is government intervention, yet your work is speculating about the potential dangers related to that government intervention. So what is it? And why is it that the people of Churchill and the people, quite frankly, of northern Manitoba are being not just not referenced in this document but also seem to be the victims of a very contradictory agenda, where we have the government touting the benefits of government intervention, which we know are completely inadequate if we lose the Wheat Board, and yet here in your very document you express danger with regard to that very government intervention?