Mr. Speaker, On May 16, I asked a question to the Minister of Agriculture about an article published in the Montreal daily La Presse , in which it was claimed that some dairy producers were illegally using recombinant bovine somatotropin. The minister tried to be reassuring by saying that his officials were investigating the allegations, and that he would inform me of their findings.
That was over three weeks ago, and I have yet to hear from the Minister of Agriculture or his parliamentary secretary. When the minister is asked what he intends to do to solve the issue, he points out that it is not the manufacturers of the product who do not comply with the moratorium, but the producers who dismiss the directive.
That answer clearly shows that the minister's primary concern is neither the reputation of dairy producers, nor the safety of consumers. The overriding consideration is big money.
It is very sad to see that no one will protect the producers and the consumers in this most important debate.
The minister clearly told us that he did not care by repeating for the umpteenth time that it is his colleague, the Minister of Health, who will make the final decision. It is too easy to just pass the buck. The Minister of Agriculture has a responsibility to dairy producers, not to rich pharmaceutical companies.
Why does the government leave a doubt as to the quality of our dairy products, considering that our producers must slow down their production and that the quality of our milk is recognized worldwide?
In my opinion, there is absolutely no reason for a Minister of Agriculture to close his eyes to acts that tarnish the excellent reputation the Quebec and Canadian dairy industry has built for itself over the years. Why does the minister allow companies like Monsanto and Ely Lilly to continue in the hope of making a fortune and having us drink milk containing a synthetic hormone?
What is on one side of the scales is becoming increasingly clear. Consumers do not want to drink milk containing recombinant bovine somatotropin at the moment, producers see no need to use the hormone and studies on the safety of the product are not conclusive.
Why put off extending the moratorium, then? Our guess is that there is no clear, explainable or public reason on the other side of the scales. Try explaining to a parent that his or her children are drinking milk that is more or less safe for purely economic reasons.
Statistics obtained in a study by Optima Research indicate very clearly that a high percentage of consumers will stop buying milk if it contains recombinant bovine somatotropin. Why in this case is the minister not protecting the interests of producers by putting pressure on his colleague in the health portfolio to put an end to the hopes of the pharmaceutical companies? I know very well that this whole matter is one of big bucks. Are there politicians or perhaps senior public servants with hidden interests?
Past certifications by Health Canada provide no assurance. They include breast implants, urea formaldehyde and thalidomide.
If it approves the use of recombinant bovine somatotropin for dairy herds, will Health Canada agree to compensate dairy producers for all consumer claims as the result of health problems arising through the consumption of dairy products?
In closing, I would ask why this government does not follow the example of the European Community and declare a moratorium until independent studies can really examine this hormone in depth? Should they ever come out in favour of its use, then and only then, could we start using recombinant bovine somatotropin.