Debates of Feb. 13th, 2001

Financial Consumer Agency Of Canada Act

[The Speaker]

Is there unanimous consent to proceed in this fashion?

[Some hon. members]

Agreed.

[John Reynolds, Canadian Alliance, West Vancouver—Sunshine Coast, BC]

Mr. Speaker, members of the Canadian Alliance are voting yes to this motion.

[Stéphane Bergeron, Bloc, Verchères—Les Patriotes, QC]

Mr. Speaker, the members of the Bloc Quebecois oppose this motion.

[Yvon Godin, NDP, Acadie—Bathurst, NB]

Mr. Speaker, members of the NDP are voting no to this motion.

[Rick Borotsik, Progressive Conservative, Brandon—Souris, MB]

Mr. Speaker, the members of the Progressive Conservative Party vote yes to this motion.

(The House divided on the motion, which was agreed to on the following division:)

Division No. 7

[The Speaker]

I declare the motion carried.

(Bill read the second time and referred to a committee)

The House resumed from February 9 consideration of the motion for an address to Her Excellency the Governor General in reply to her speech at the opening of the session.

Speech From The Throne

[The Speaker]

Pursuant to order made on Friday, February 9, 2001, the House will now proceed to the taking of the deferred recorded division on the motion relating to the Address in Reply to the Speech from the Throne.

[Marlene Catterall, Liberal, Ottawa West—Nepean, ON]

Mr. Speaker, if you were to seek it, the House would give its consent that members who voted on the previous motion be recorded as having voted on the motion now before the House, with Liberal members being recorded as voting yea.

[The Speaker]

Is there unanimous consent to proceed in this fashion?

[Some hon. members]

Agreed.

[John Reynolds, Canadian Alliance, West Vancouver—Sunshine Coast, BC]

Mr. Speaker, members of the Canadian Alliance Party will vote a resounding no to this motion.

[Stéphane Bergeron, Bloc, Verchères—Les Patriotes, QC]

Mr. Speaker, the members of the Bloc Quebecois will vote against this motion.

[Yvon Godin, NDP, Acadie—Bathurst, NB]

Mr. Speaker, the members of the NDP will vote against this motion.

[Rick Borotsik, Progressive Conservative, Brandon—Souris, MB]

Mr. Speaker, members of the Progressive Conservative Party vote no to this motion.

(The House divided on the motion, which was agreed to on the following division:)

Division No. 8

[The Speaker]

I declare the motion carried.

[Don Boudria, Liberal, Leader of the Government in the House of Commons]

moved:

That the Address be engrossed and presented to Her Excellency the Governor General by the Speaker.

[The Speaker]

Is it the pleasure of the House to adopt the motion?

[Some hon. members]

Agreed.

(Motion agreed to)

Agriculture

[The Deputy Speaker]

The House will now proceed to the consideration of a motion to adjourn the House for the purpose of discussing a specific and important matter requiring urgent consideration, namely, the agricultural policy.

[Rick Borotsik, Progressive Conservative, Brandon—Souris, MB]

moved:

That this House do now adjourn.

Mr. Speaker, first I thank the Speaker for allowing this very important debate on agriculture as we all recognize that agriculture is going through some very strenuous times today. Also, I will be splitting my time with the hon. member for Calgary Centre.

Too often members of society outside the agricultural sector have a tendency to believe that farmers and agricultural producers have a tendency to cry wolf. Perhaps they should think—

[Gerald Keddy, Progressive Conservative, South Shore, NS]

Mr. Speaker, I rise on a point of order. With all due respect to my hon. colleague, there are several meetings going on here between members of parliament that should take place behind the curtain. This is an extremely important issue that needs to be discussed in the House and should be listened to.

[The Speaker]

I could not agree more with the hon. member for South Shore. I have tried to encourage hon. members to refrain from carrying on their discussions in the House. The hon. member for Brandon—Souris has a very powerful voice and one can hear him but they are distracting. I urge hon. members to carry on their conversations outside the House so we can hear the debate.

[Rick Borotsik, Progressive Conservative, Brandon—Souris, MB]

Mr. Speaker, I know you have control of the House as you have had for any number of years. I do appreciate that.

This is a very important issue, not only to my constituents but to constituents across our great country who work the land, who plant the seeds and who harvest those seeds to make sure that we as Canadians have a reliable, cheap food supply.

I will base my discussion on three tenets. Canadians are continually asking me why agriculture finds itself in the position it is in today. In order to answer that we must recognize a number of things.

The first problem is that there is a very unlevel playing field in the world today. There is a very unlevel playing field in the subsidies that are being provided by our major trading partners, the European Union and the United States of America.

Canadians have not been given the same opportunity to compete on a level playing field.

In 1997 for every dollar Canadians spent on farm support, Americans spent $2.06, the European Union spent $2.14 and Japan spent $3.47. There is a terrible disparity between the agricultural support systems of other jurisdictions and that of Canada.

Canada spends .78% of its GDP on agricultural support while the U.S. spends 1.07% of its GDP on agricultural support. We do not have a level playing field with respect to world subsidies.

The second problem in agriculture right now is the fact that costs are going up at an alarming rate. It costs farmers and producers substantially more to put in a crop today than it did yesterday.

We all recognize that gasoline and fuel costs have gone up quite dramatically. The government recognized that by giving Canadians an energy rebate. The cost of putting gasoline into tractors, combines and other farm equipment went from 37 cents a litre to over 50 cents a litre for the crop year starting in 2000. Those costs are horrendous considering the number of acres farmed across the country.

One of the major inputs to produce a crop is fertilizer. One of the major components in raw materials such as fertilizer is natural gas. We recognize that the cost of natural gas has increased substantially over the last while. Nitrogen has in some cases gone from 16 cents a pound to 40 cents a pound this spring.

That may not mean a lot to those who live in downtown Toronto, Vancouver or Ottawa, but when a crop is put in the ground those inputs are required in order to get a yield. The costs cannot be recovered. Unfair subsidies and the cost of production have gone up dramatically.

The third problem is the value of the commodity coming back to the producer. In 1996-97 a producer received $5.50 a bushel for wheat. Today that same bushel of wheat is returning $2.45. If we look at the increase in input costs, at the unfair subsidies and at the commodity values that come back to the producer, how can a farmer stay in business?

Canola, a crop that I see every day of my life with its wonderful yellow flowers growing out of the ground, returned $10 a bushel in 1996-97. That same cash crop today is now $5.18. The value of the commodity has dropped dramatically.

Half my time in my constituency is spent dealing with agricultural problems. People 60 years of age, farmers who have been in the industry all their lives, have come into my office and said that they will not put in a crop this year. They own their land, they are 60 years of age, and they are tired of wasting their money every year. They not prepared to do it any more. Farmers are walking away. They are putting the land back into an inventory and renting it out.

A friend of mine who lives in a certain area just south of my city said that there are 50 more quarter sections of land for rent this year than there were last year. The producers are walking away and trying to rent land. Land values are coming down. Rental values are coming down. Those individuals, unfortunately, are no longer part of our agricultural society. We lost 21,200 farmers last year alone. There are 21,200 fewer farmers this year than last year, and believe me, when people say no, those are the facts. That is the truth. Let us quit sticking our heads in the sand. Let us put support systems in place so that our farmers can stay on the land.

The last question I have before I turn the discussion over to the right hon. member for Calgary Centre is, what can and what should we do?

On that side of the House prior to the election, the government decided and had the political will to give Canadians an energy rebate. Somehow $1.3 billion was found and distributed with the snap of a finger. I will not argue whether it was right or wrong, only that there was a political will to do it.

There are dollars available in government coffers right now. There has to be a political will to help farmers through the next planting season. Those dollars can be distributed in any number of ways.

I do not want to hear that it is countervailable or that there is a trade issue here. We have $2 billion of wiggle room in the WTO agreement we negotiated with the United States. We have the room. We have the money. We need the will.

We need two things. We need an immediate cash infusion into the agricultural community. Then we need something more. We need a vision and an understanding as to where agriculture is going in the country. We need a vision. We need a long term support program. We need something farmers can latch onto to give them hope for the future.

I have a 40 year old cousin who has farmed all his life. He is asking himself whether he should continue or quit farming. He needs a glimmer of hope to be able to continue to farm. He wants to continue but he wants the opportunity to provide his family a livelihood. He does not want to lose money any more, year after year after year, and have a government that is not prepared to assist.

I thank the Speaker of the House for allowing my constituents to have their say on what is happening with respect to agriculture and to their communities. It is not only agriculture that is in jeopardy, it is also the communities that feed off agriculture. Canada is losing its rural communities and it is up to the government to give them the opportunity, the hope, the assistance and the support they need to continue in agriculture.