That is true. Now let them squirm and let them listen because they are being taken to task.
Who else supports the inclusion clause? The Saskatchewan Wheat Pool and the prairie pools. Reformers laugh. The biggest company in Saskatchewan is the Saskatchewan Wheat Pool. The wheat pools speak for thousands and thousands of farmers. It is the majority farm organization, it markets grain and it supports the inclusion clause. And the Reform Party says that nobody does. The Saskatchewan Wheat Pool does.
The Reform Party should not be misleading the House, and that is why we in our party are very proud to support the Saskatchewan Wheat Pool. My family has been involved as members of the Saskatchewan Wheat Pool since its foundation. It supports the inclusion clause.
Keystone Agricultural Producers Inc. of Manitoba also supports the inclusion clause as well as the Concerned Farmers for Saving the Wheat Board. Finally, the wheat board advisory committee, whose members are elected by prairie farmers, supports the inclusion clause. The overwhelming majority of people across the prairies and in the province of Saskatchewan are in support of the Canadian Wheat Board and they want an inclusion clause so that if farmers want more grains in the wheat board, they will have that right.
It is about time the Reform Party was taken to task. The Reform Party is not telling the truth in the House of Commons and not reflecting its constituents' views. That is the party that said it would reflect the voices of its constituents when it was in the House of Commons. It is not doing that. The Saskatchewan government is supportive. The wheat pools are supportive. The wheat pool is a big, credible organization. The Canadian Federation of Agriculture is supportive. The wheat board advisory committee which is elected by farmers supports the inclusion clause, but here is the Reform Party, which is not used to being challenged in the House, trying to mislead the Canadian people that prairie farmers oppose the inclusion clause.
There is the member for Souris—Moose Mountain who used to be a member of the provincial Conservative Party in Saskatchewan as an MLA. We know what happened to that party. It has now been put to sleep for 10 years.
The Reform Party believes in referenda and in consulting people. A while back a very clear question was put to the prairie producers. It concerned whether or not they wanted barley marketed by the wheat board or outside the wheat board. The prairie producers responded with 63% who voted that yes, they wanted to keep barley in the Canadian Wheat Board, while 37% voted no. They responded to a very clear question.
The Reform Party is supposed to be reflecting those views in the House of Commons. Reformers are supposed to reflect the views of their constituents in the House of Commons or resign or be recalled. Why do they not reflect that point of view in the House of Commons? It was a clear question.
The National Farmers Union is also in support of the inclusion clause. The farmers union itself, which has been very involved in these issues, thought the question was clear. I wonder where the Reform Party comes from. When it comes to really representing the point of view of its constituents in the House of Commons it just does not do it.
I assure the House that the people of Saskatchewan support the Canadian Wheat Board. They have always supported the Canadian Wheat Board. They want some collective clout in the marketplace and we will reflect that point of view here in the House of Commons.
I have another concern that was raised by the Reform Party, that there is no reference to provinces. It has been said in the House with some of these rather right wing points of view that they would like the provinces to opt out.
Now, of course, Reform Party members applaud these extreme right wing points of view, these friends of Conrad Black, friends of the Canadian grain exchange and of the Canadian Taxpayers Federation. They listen to them instead of listening to the wheat pool of Saskatchewan, the farmers union or the federation of agriculture or the people's organizations. They just listen to the people who have the money. They want to destroy the wheat board. They want a province to have the option of opting out of the Canadian Wheat Board like the province of Alberta. Of course, if that power is put into the act it will be the destruction of the wheat board. So I certainly oppose that as well. I am sure that Canadian farmers will also oppose that point of view.
Here are some so-called farmers from British Columbia and Alberta who are campaigning against the Canadian Wheat Board. However, I can assure members of the House that there is very strong support for orderly marketing and for the Canadian Wheat Board. All the major credible farm organizations that support the board want the inclusion clause. They want farmers to have the right to vote if they so wish to include other grains under the authority of the Canadian Wheat Board. They also support the exclusion clause so that farmers if they so wish can vote to have a grain taken out of the authority of the wheat board. Why is the Reform Party against that democratic right? It is a right that the farmers want.
I know the truth hurts. If we listen to the Reform Party we would think there was never a vote on barley or that the question was fudged on barley. The question was very clear and there was a very clear answer. I am very surprised that the Saskatchewan Reform members, in particular, are talking this way. In Saskatchewan the yes vote for the inclusion of barley was higher than in Alberta and Manitoba. Why are Reform members not reflecting the wishes of their constituents in the House? Why are they not listening to their constituents? Why should they not be recalled?
Why will this very shy member from Souris—Moose Mountain not get up and say “the farmers in my riding voted to have barley in the wheat board”? Instead he stands in the House and says people in the province do not want the inclusion clause. They are against it and they are fearful of the inclusion clause. That is a bunch of bloody rubbish and he would know it if he used his two ears to listen to his people. People are very supportive of that clause. It is important that be put on the record.