The member wants to hear about the double loonie. I am very pleased to have aroused some interest from members opposite. It is a pleasure to know they are listening at such an important time.
The report stage motions before us relate to Bill C-76, the budget implementation bill. The amendment put forward by my colleague from Kamloops, which was seconded by me, proposes to eliminate those sections of Bill C-76 which deal with the government's proposal to remove the Crow benefit. That is the benefit that applies to western Canadian farmers for the movement of their grain from farm gate to port.
I have been engaged in this debate for quite some time. The constituency I represent is rural and relies heavily on agricultural income to survive. The constituency which I have represented for six years has been engaged in the debate over the future of the Crow benefit for quite some time. My constituents have advised me frequently and constantly of the need to retain the Crow benefit.
Through the motion which is before the House today, I ask members to consider eliminating these sections from the bill in order that we can study in greater detail the future implications of this very rash move which the government has undertaken.
The minister of agriculture will recall that at the beginning of this debate I asked the minister to withhold the sections of the bill, the intention to eliminate the Crow benefit, until such time as we did investigate the full implications of this move on the prairies.
I put forward that proposal before this debate began and here we are at report stage, prior to third reading, and the government has not indicated any understanding of the implications of what the elimination of the Crow benefit will mean to the prairie economy.
The argument comes down to the fact that for each elevator point on the prairies those communities will lose $1 million in income currently in those communities. I have previously used Glaslyn, Saskatchewan, a community of about 350 people, a
fairly large elevator market area with a very good, strong delivery point.
Currently $1 million in that community will not be there after August 1 when this bill comes into effect; $1 million from that community, $4 million from the city of North Battleford and millions more taken from rural Saskatchewan as a result of the implications of this bill.
What does that mean in terms of the future of those communities simply because they are growing wheat which is demanded by countries all over the world, countries not paying the freight on that product but expecting our farmers to pay the freight to get it to port position so that it is competitive?
A presentation by the prairie pools to a committee in Ottawa on April 27, 1995 concluded: "The termination of government transportation assistance and the resulting decrease in farm incomes not only threaten the vision but the ability of the Canadian industry to even maintain its current competitive position in the world markets".
These are people who deliver a product to that competitive marketplace telling us very clearly in response to this move on this bill the vision of agriculture as presented by the government enhancing our competitive position is threatened and that our ability to compete is threatened. We should pay heed to some of these experts who have been commenting on this over the years.
I also quote from another presentation made before the finance committee studying Bill C-76. The national farmers union's report concluded that the cuts in the federal budget, which are in addition to the elimination of the Crow benefit and including it, will have an unprecedented impact-