Mr. Speaker, I am honoured today to add my voice to the second reading debate on Bill C-212, an act put forward by the hon. member for Lisgar-Marquette to amend the Canadian Wheat Board Act.
The government does not support the bill. The government's opposition to the bill is based on a significant number of factors and very important considerations.
One such factor the government bases its decision on to oppose the bill is the timing. The bill proposes to make a major change to the operations of the Canadian Wheat Board without any discussion or consultation with farmers across the country.
The hon. member who makes this motion comes from a party which says it listens to what the people have to say, which says it seeks input before making decisions to change legislation, which says it will do what its constituents want.
Once again we see, as evidenced by this high handed, pre-emptory proposal, an attempt to change in a very significant and serious manner legislation without proper consultation with farmers, organizations and people across the country whose lives depend on farming; to change the Canadian Wheat Board in a fundamental way without any discussion or consultation with farmers.
This merely shows the hypocrisy with which the Reform Party put forward this idea: listen to the constituents until they do not agree with you and then go ahead and do what you want. This is Reform Party policy to a tee.
The federal government has a process in place where it is now engaged in a prairie-wide consultation with grain producers, grain companies and other organizations that have a direct interest in the future shape of western Canada's grain marketing system.
This is the approach that is always taken by this government. We listen to the organizations that will be affected in order to hear what they have to say. We listen to what farmers, grain companies and corporations involved in the farming industry have to say. We listen to what all stakeholders have to say with respect to the Canadian Wheat Board before deciding on change.
Once we have gathered all the input, we then consider what direction the Canadian Wheat Board will take in the future. This process is in place right now.
Without addressing the specific pros and cons of the bill, the government feels any decisions taken on either the Canadian Wheat Board or the grain marketing system must await the final outcome of this process. This is a process which has been started. Obviously it makes sense that we allow this process to continue, that we allow the committee to make its report to the minister before making a decision.
Certainly it would seem strange if we set out a process to review concerns and issues with respect to the wheat board. We set that process in place and then make changes before the process is even complete. That does not make any sense. Then again, I suppose what does make sense is that it would be suggested by the Reform Party.
The whole issue about grain marketing and the role of the Canadian Wheat Board has been the subject of very intense debate across the prairies for the last three or four years.
The difficulty with this debate has been that it has tended to take place in a rather ad hoc fashion with no co-ordination or focus. That is why the Minister of Agriculture and Agri-Food last year established the panel that I have talked about, the committee that I have talked about, the Western Grain Marketing Panel.
The panel is composed of a chairman and eight individuals who represent virtually every perspective on grain marketing from one end of the spectrum to the other. That is certainly a fair approach.
We want input to be heard by people who represent all points of view. Proceeding in that manner, the report of the committee will have a significant amount of credibility.
Late last year the panel distributed copies of a tabloid style information package to all western grain producers. This ensured that every farmer in western Canada had complete access to all the relevant facts and figures that relate to grain marketing.
In January the panel conducted a series of town hall information meetings across the prairies. These sessions gave grain producers the opportunity to bring forward their perspectives and opinions, to advance their best arguments and to engage in a logical, face to face dialogue about all the pros and cons of the issue of grain marketing.
The panel has now completed its third phase, hearing more than 80 formal submissions from a wide variety of farm groups and industry. These sessions took place across western Canada. They took place in Winnipeg, Edmonton, Regina.
The Reform Party made a presentation before the panel on March 18. Now it wants to pre-empt the process its members participated in. This does not make any sense at all. As I said before, the only thing that makes sense about something not making sense is that it is proposed by the Reform Party. I take this to mean its participation in the process is that its members agree with the validity of it. I congratulate them for joining in and participating, like they should.
Now I encourage them to let the process take its course, come forward with its conclusions and when the minister makes his decisions, to support the minister in his decisions, which no doubt will be the best for the western grain farmer.
With all the consultations, examinations and cross-examinations, everyone with an interest in western Canada's grain marketing system has had their say on the issue.
As we debate this motion in the House today, the panel is preparing to write its report, which will be submitted to the minister in June. It is from this report, its observations and conclusions based on the input of producers and other stakeholders that the government will look for constructive suggestions on how to move forward.
If the government agreed now to make such a major change to the Canadian Wheat Board before it had received the report we would be dishonouring a commitment we made to the grain producers across the country that no major change would be made without consulting them.
That is something the government will not do, even though the Reform Party seems very keen on doing it. It seems evident by the precise nature of this motion that once again it betrays the motive of the Reform Party, which simply is to utterly destroy the Canadian Wheat Board.
The grain industry is a very competitive industry. Every little shred of information that a competitor can possibly get is of value. Certainly we want to ensure a proper balance between accountability to those it serves and protecting the competitive edge of the Canadian Wheat Board as it is marketing its grain worldwide.
Here we have hon. members from the Reform Party reading from a document that is four years old and setting out criticisms contained in that document when the wheat board has moved on those issues and has improved how it does its business. It has an audit. There is no sense duplicating efforts by having another audit take place which would have-