Debates of Oct. 12th, 2004

Agriculture

[Wayne Easter, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Agriculture and Agri-Food (Rural Development)]

Madam Chair, I want clarification on the response to the question from the member for Haldimand—Norfolk.

The question came across to me as if the member for Haldimand—Norfolk was asking for special privileges for Quebec producers. I hope that was not the case because we have tried as a government to come up with a program that is equitable to all producers across the country and that it is the best for all producers. Quebec certainly benefits from the national supply management system. It is as a result of the Canadian supply management system that the producers in Quebec are able to do as well as they are under that system.

I was concerned about the question from the member for Haldimand—Norfolk. There may have been an implication, based on her question, that there should be special privileges for one province versus another. I wonder what the member's response to that might be.

[Peter Adams, Liberal, Peterborough, ON]

Madam Chair, when I replied I tried to respond in that vein.

In the case of cull cows, given the significance of the dairy industry in Quebec, it obviously is of special importance in Quebec. I think the parliamentary secretary's words are right. The dairy industry is important in Quebec and the cull cow problem is very important there. Whatever cull cow program we have should be, as he says, equitable across the whole country. I think that is the function of the Government of Canada.

[Larry Miller, Conservative, Grey—Bruce—Owen Sound, ON]

Madam Chair, I want to go back to the comments by the member for Peterborough.

I am very aware that he is not the Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Agriculture. Where I was leading on this was that in an important and very urgent crisis like the one we have on our hands, I would presume there would probably be two or three updates a day, maybe even hourly, from the agriculture minister. No matter where the member sits, I would presume he would have that kind of information on something this important.

[Peter Adams, Liberal, Peterborough, ON]

Madam Chair, to the best of my knowledge, most of the members have that information. There is a website which I am sure the member consults on a regular basis. Information is posted there.

I receive regular information through parliamentary e-mail, as I think do all members here. Perhaps the member would care to consult with my farmers, I do not know how he corresponds with his, but in addition to my own website, I do mailings on this topic updating the farmers roughly every two weeks. I have been doing so for more than 12 months.

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

Madam Chair, I want to congratulate you on your election as Assistant Deputy Chair of Committees of the Whole. It is very interesting to see you fulfill these duties. I know that you will do a good job and that the members of this House will like you. I welcome you.

It is with great pleasure that I have the opportunity tonight to speak on the topic of BSE. Normally I speak in French but tonight I will try my best to speak English, the language spoken by the farmer to whom I spoke the other day.

Yesterday, during Thanksgiving, I took the time to sit down with a farmer. He was cutting his corn. He stopped his machines because he wanted a message to be brought to the House of Commons. I know the farmer, David Whelton, is listening tonight. He lives in Pokeshaw, New Brunswick. He said that he hoped the members of the House of Commons would stop picking at each other and try to find a solution because he was losing his shirt.

He gave me a message to bring to the House of Commons, and it gives me great pleasure to do that. We throw around blame but the end result is what we will do for the farmers.

In August last year I had a press conference in Bathurst, New Brunswick. David and other dairy farmers were with me. Also, my colleague, Dick Proctor, from Moose Jaw, was with me. I remember what David said at the press conference. He asked what was happening between the farmer and consumer. He said that he used to get $1,400 for his beef but was getting between $300 and $500. He said that he went to the super store and it was still the same price for steaks. He asked at the store what was happening to the price between himself and the store. He was told that the store was paying the full price, so David asked to be shown the bills to see how much the store was paying. The person at the store said that he could not do that.

David told me about his financial picture before May 20, 2003. He had a debt of $260,000. He had cattle worth $360,000. He is maybe not a big farmer but he is one of the farmers we love in our area. He had feed valued at $100,000. He said he had no mortgage, no debts and no bills, but he had $200,000 net if he was to sell all his cattle. That was before May 20, 2003.

Now he has $30,000 worth of cattle. He has feed worth about $50,000 to $80,000. He has minus $35,000 in accounts payable and a debt load of $550,000. If we put the $515,000 and the $200,000 that he would have had, it makes a difference of $715,000. Now he must sign a mortgage with the Farm Credit Corporation of Canada to convert $260,000 of debt to a long-term 20-year mortgage at prime plus 3.25%.

He had to borrow from the Royal Bank $350,000 as an operating loan to refill his feedlot to handle 300 head of cattle to start over. The operating loan is guaranteed by the New Brunswick government at 80% in order for the bank to lend the funds. An annual cost guarantee to the provincial government is as follows: an annual payment to the province of New Brunswick of a guaranteed loan will cost him $4,200; an annual interest payment to the farm credit for $260,000 at the prime rate of 3.25%; and an annual payment to the Royal Bank for the $300,000 at prime plus 3.25%. Today to keep his farm, he must take a very large increase in his debt load.

After paying the New Brunswick government, farm credit and the Royal Bank, the chance of making a living with a farm is very slim. Not only will meat packers make money from the mad cow disaster, but the bank and the government will make money from people who are losing their shirts.

Between the farmer and the consumer what is happening? I remember we had to twist the arms of the meat packers to get them to come to the parliamentary committee. Where are we going as a country, when our farmers are going down the drain. What are we doing?

David is very sad today. He had a nice little farm and he had money in the bank. Now he is going broke like many other farmers. I would like to thank David for giving us this story, a real one, one about what people are living today.

He applied for a grant and he got $9,000. It cost him $3,000 for the accounting firm just to fill out the forms. He made $5,000 out of $8,000. It cost him $3,000. He gave me all the forms that he had been filling out for over a year, but he is getting nowhere. Know what the department told him? He was turned down because, by their calculations, he did not lose enough money to trigger the payment. What a shame it is to have a program that is not enough. We believe the meat packers and big super stores are making money. They even are getting the money from the government.

The little farmer is not getting the money. He applied last year and he is still waiting for an answer. He was told he would have to wait another 60 days before something would happen. That will be November 25, 2004, 13 months after his first paperwork was sent to the CAIS program. We have a problem.

My colleague said not too long ago that Parliament had no power over the bureaucrats. If we do not have any power, we have a problem. When we talk about what is happening in the United States, we are being nice. We should punish the United States with our free trade. We have free trade one way, and the Americans find a way to stop us.

We had a problem with chickens from two states. All Canada said was that it would not take chickens from these two states. We did not say that we would stop taking chickens from all states. The BSE incident happened in Alberta and the whole country was stopped from sending its beef to the U.S. It was one case. We have eaten more beef in the last few years than we have ever eaten and no one has died.

I was in Taiwan a couple of weeks ago, and I asked a question. Members from the Conservative Party and the Bloc Quebecois were there also and they asked why they did not buy our beef. The answer was that they had not been convinced technically that it was okay.

Are we doing our job? Did we try to convince them? Did we show them the proof? We told the Taiwan people and the foreign deputy minister that we believed the only reason we were having the problem with the United States was because they did not want our beef, the same way they did not want our softwood lumber. They have been treating us the same way for the last few years, and it is not right.

A member from the Conservative Party has said that we should go to the States and sit there until the Americans understand. They do understand. However, this is not right. We have to look more at how to treat our people.

Maybe I can suggest a solution to the government. Why do we not set up a royal commission? We could find out what is happening in Canada alone. Why is it today our farmers get $500 or $600 for a beef, yet when we go to the store, we still pay the same price? Why is the steak still $11.50 per pound, but the farmer is losing his shirt, a guy like David who was working late yesterday. It is the same thing with the one in Alberta, the one in Winnipeg, the one in Edmundston, New Brunswick, the one in Sussex, New Brunswick , the one Nanaimo and the one in St. George, B.C. I think it is important. I think the people and farmers are sick and tired too that we are having these discussions. While we are having these discussions, for over a year they have been losing their shirts. That is not right.

I hope we do more than just talk among ourselves. I hope we find a solution for the farmers. There is a solution, but we have to do the right thing. We are together here to find the solution for our farmers.

[Wayne Easter, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Agriculture and Agri-Food (Rural Development)]

Madam Chair, there were examples that came up earlier, similar to the producer the hon. member mentioned. We have said and we know that producers are in very tough financial shape. In fact the example I gave earlier, which we have to try to address, is the food price spread within Canada. I have a grading certificate here from a producer that is a neighbour of mine, similar to the case the hon. member mentioned, in which eight cattle were shipped. Seven of them were triple A, the best cattle that we can ship, and one was a double A. The individual was paid from $1.29 to $1.33 per pound. How does that compare to the price of steak when we buy it in the store?

The point I made earlier, which I want to make again in response to the member's remarks, is that I would hope when Canadian consumers go into the stores, they ask if beef they are buying is Canadian. There are instances in the country where it is not. The Government of Canada has not issued supplementals. We have issued, I believe, a half tonne of supplemental imports this year. I believe Canadians should be asking if they are buying Canadian beef and supporting the Canadian producers. They should be asking why is a greater share of that dollar not going to Canadian producers from the packing, the processing and the grocery chains in this industry? I agree with the hon. member on the point. Yes, farmers are in serious shape in every province across the country and they are indeed suffering.

Also for the member's benefit, I do want to mention what the government has been doing. All too often we fail to mention that. We recognize that we need the border to be open. On September 10, the minister took a somewhat different tack and said first, that we would keep the pressure on the Americans to open the border, and everybody in the House wants the border open. Second, he said that we would move to increase our slaughter capacity within Canada and we would assist the industry to do that. Third, he said that we would bring in the two set aside programs to try to at least bring some normalcy to the market so that prices should rebound, should come up and producers would be paid out of the marketplace in the interim while we were getting the slaughter capacity up to speed. Fourth, the minister today has gone to Japan, Korea, China and Hong Kong and the Prime Minister is in Russia to try to increase our exports elsewhere around the world to lessen our dependency on the United States markets.

The point I want to make is, yes, the hon. member's case is similar to many in the country, but let us not deny that the government is not also trying its best to improve the financial situation on the farm and trying to move us down the road with a Canadian position for the future.

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

Madam Chair, I appreciate the comments from my colleague from P.E.I. We are seeing the same problem in both provinces and we are in agreement. However, what is the government doing? We must also agree that it has been happening since May of last year. Why does a farmer have to wait 13 months to get an answer? Why are farmers losing their shirts and the government is saying that they did not lose enough? There is something wrong with the program. It is as simple as that.

What are we going to do for the guy from Pokeshaw? What are we going to do for the guy from P.E.I.? What are we going to do for the guy from Gaspé, or the guy along Highway 20 coming up to Ottawa? What are we going to do for the guy in Timmins, Ontario? What are we going to do for all those farmers in southern Ontario?

When a farmer who has other things to pay has to pay an accounting firm to work on his papers to try to save his farm, what are we going to do? That is the question that David Whelton is asking and I am supporting what he is asking. What are we going to do to help those people? It does not make sense that a farmer has to wait 13 months.

We need to expedite this faster than that. We must be able to do something other than ask farmers to fill out a 10-page form, to go back five years and spend more time. They do not have time for that, they have to look after their beef. They have to look after their farms. That is the matter that is important today.

At the same time, what about the meat packers? What is happening with them, or the big SuperValu, or the Sobeys and Loblaws? Why are we not asking them why we are paying the same price in the store for Canadian beef and the farmer is not getting paid?

Why not raise this question as a government? The government has that power. The government has the power to do something, to carry out a study, or we have no business being here. If we have no power then we have no business being in the House of Commons. We are here to protect the people and we are here to protect our farmers. It may be nice to have a car, but maybe we do not need it. It may be nice to have a motorcycle, but maybe we do not need it. However, we need food and we must support our farmers.

I am sure that the United States is supporting its farmers. I am sure that any other country in the world is supporting its farmers, but our farmers have been let go. The government will say no, it has done all kinds of great things, but the answer is still that the farmers are not happy because they feel they have been left behind. They are the ones who get up at 5 o'clock in the morning and are in the barn. They are the ones who have to go and get all the feed. They are the ones who have to work seven days a week. They are the ones who do the hard work, and they are the ones who are treated the worst right now. It is not right.

That is why I call upon the government to do something different and do it faster. We need to help farmers, have better answers for them, and have programs that will help our small farmers too. That is what we need.

I do not want to take anything away from what the government has done, but it does not work when a farmer has to wait 13 months for an answer. It does not work when the department says a farmer did not lose enough when he is $550,000 in the hole. That is not an answer. It is not right.

It is not the first time that I have spoken to farmers. They are going through hell. Our dairy farmers are going through hell. It is not acceptable. We have to look after the ones who provide us with food. We are losing them and we will have big business looking after it.

If we are going to help farmers, maybe we should help them create co-ops to do their own processing. Maybe that is the competition we need. Those farmers were telling me they had a group and wanted to create one in P.E.I. Maybe we should support that. We should take a stronger look at it and how we could advance a solution faster. Maybe that will be the answer.

[Charlie Angus, NDP, Timmins—James Bay, ON]

Madam Chair, I was at one of our northern fall fairs in an area that used to have massive agriculture. I was told about the Saturday morning farmers' market where American tourists used to come, but they do not have farmers at the market any more. They just have local people selling little Phentex booties and folk art. The tourists asked why they called it a farmers' market and where were the farmers? The person said “nobody wanted farmers and there are not any anymore”.

I would like to get a sense of what is happening in New Brunswick because every time I go back to my riding, the overall sense I get is of despair. Earlier this summer people were positive. They thought the border was going to reopen and they could hold on, but people are now talking about what they are losing. They do not know where the money is. We are being told that this program will put money in farmers' hands this fall, but there does not seem to be any program in place. Our farmers are not eligible for CAISP though they thought they were. They do not know how this feeder set-aside works. They phone me and ask how they can get this money.

I do not tell them where to get the money because I know how long it took them to get the last round of money. Farmers in my region are deciding whether to pack it in or not and already half are downsizing their herds. They cannot wait any longer and they hear that there is going to be money in their hands this fall.

I often feel like a discredited person when I go back to the riding and tell them there is going to be money because I do not know where that money is. I would like to ask the hon. member, does he have a similar experience in New Brunswick? Does he know if the money is there?

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

Madam Chair, the simple answer is yes. Many farmers have packed it in and have left. So much land has been abandoned. We are making a big mistake.

[Charles Hubbard, Liberal, Miramichi, NB]

Madam Chair, we are having a very good debate tonight. It is certainly frustrating to so many people who are probably watching this, as farmers back home are looking at a very desperate situation.

It is difficult to believe that until May 2003 our farm community in the beef and dairy sector were doing quite well. Then lo and behold, one lowly animal was brought to slaughter. Of the probably 15 million cattle we have in this country, one cow went to market and it was found that that cow had BSE. With that, it entirely changed the outlook of our beef production in this country.

We know that in terms of changing the Crow business back in the early 1990s, the west especially developed a large feedlot industry. We know that until the period of May 2003 that most beef farmers producing quality A beef would probably get between $1.70 and $1.80 per pound.

I would like to point out that in our agricultural community, we have done very well in trying to identify an animal that would be brought to market, in terms of where that animal was, what it was fed, and how it arrived there, because back in the 1990s we brought in an identification system by which cattle were tagged. When a cow went to market, it was very easy for the packing plant to determine the history of that animal.

So in terms of the work that our Department of Agriculture and our producers have done over the last 10 years, we have done an excellent job in identifying beef production. But lo and behold, we found that the Americans decided to close their market. We have trouble trying to reason why the Americans would do that when in fact about 80% of our cattle that was leaving this country was going to the American market.

We also have to realize that in terms of BSE, along with another disease that was prevalent in parts of Europe called Johne's, it had reached proportions, especially in the United Kingdom, where a serious look had to be taken at the livestock industry. The British at that time, back in the 1990s, decided they had to have a major cull to destroy a lot of animals that had been fed certain foodstuffs.

The Americans, looking at their markets in terms of Asia, were afraid that they would have trouble selling American beef to the Japanese, Korean and other Asian markets. That may justify to them why they did that to us. Our own cattle industry, which was producing excellent beef, and our dairy industry, which was selling good genetics not only to the United States but to Mexico and to other countries, were all affected by the American ban that began back in May and June of 2003.

We had a previous debate on this subject in the House and we brought out some excellent points. With those points, our government has made certain changes in terms of our livestock industry. It has worked hard with producers and with provincial governments. In fact, our federal government has put nearly $2 billion into this problem already.

However, tonight as we address the issue we know full well that even though we have put a lot of money into it, there are still farmers like David Whelton out in Pokeshaw, New Brunswick, whom I know very well, who has trouble at his farm in trying to meet the demands that the banks and others are putting on his own livelihood. As we address this issue, we realize that across this country there are many people, like the constituent in Acadie--Bathurst, who are in grave circumstances as a result of the BSE problems.

I would suggest that the matter, in terms of opening the markets, especially the American market, has been a serious problem, one that our minister has spent a lot of time with. Both our previous minister and the present Minister of Agriculture and Agri-Food have worked with the Americans. They have talked to the American secretary of agriculture. They have also worked with Asia in trying to get markets in Korea and Japan and other places.

Today we know, as we look at this livestock industry, that more things have to be done. We know that there has to be increased slaughter capacity. In fact, if we do not increase our capacity and find markets for our beef, then we will find that a growing number of livestock back at the farm level will get older and older and will eventually have to be dealt with.

One of the members tonight talked about the price of beef and the fact that consumers are paying what he called an exorbitant price for beef while at the same time farmers generally do very well today to get $1.30 for hot rail grade A quality beef. We are told in terms of economics that two things are happening. First of all we are dealing with a situation where we do not have enough slaughter capacity but Canadian consumers are demanding more beef. As a result, in terms of the two forces pushing together, the Canadian consumer is paying too much for the meat he is buying for his daily table.

I would suggest that unless we develop a major culling program in this country to cut back on our inventory of animals over 30 months of age, many of them getting older, in fact older yesterday than they are today, we in fact will be facing disaster in terms of the livestock industry.

I know it is a very difficult thing to talk in terms of a cull. The British have done that very extensively. It would improve the genetics in our livestock herds and would offer our farmers an opportunity to develop our market, which would meet the supply that they are offering to the Canadian consumer.

We have had a good debate. I certainly hope I will get some questions on what I have said. We have had a number of programs and all of them have worked a little, but the situation has to be addressed in terms of the producer, the provincial governments and our own department, which has worked quite extensively to try to find a solution to this problem.

[Myron Thompson, Conservative, Wild Rose, AB]

Madam Chair, I would like to know if the member could explain to me why the government in the last 18 months has not made a constant effort to put a lobby group in the Asian market. The Americans are over there lobbying every day. As we speak, they are there lobbying. They work at it day in and day out. Believe me, they are not lobbying on behalf of Canadians. They are lobbying on behalf of the Americans.

At the same time, I am wondering why after the election--I do not know why it did not happen before the election--Canada did not have a group constantly in the States. I do not mean to visit for a day or two and then come home. Why did we not send a constant group of people made up of parliamentarians, provincial people, industry people, consumers and some of our friends across the border who also want the border open? Why is this not being done? What is the reluctance? Why do we always come up with massive multi-million dollar programs that nobody can fulfill, nobody can understand and nobody benefits from?

Why are we not doing some very active things? Why are we not there now, today, making sure that every one of the congressmen understand the problem? I can assure the member that a lot of them do not even know there is a problem. There is a lack of action or lack of initiative. I would ask the member to explain to me why the government has not taken some very simple but concrete actions such as those being taken south of the border.

[Charles Hubbard, Liberal, Miramichi, NB]

Madam Chair, I thought I mentioned in my speech the fact that two different agricultural ministers have gone to Asia. Our ministers have been in constant contact with the secretary of agriculture in the United States. Personally, I have been to Washington with a group representing all parties to speak with the livestock industry, with the American consumers, with the American beef industry and with numerous congressmen. A number of us also represented Canada at the meeting of the WTO, where we discussed this problem with the Mexicans, with the Japanese and with other countries.

The member may use the word “constantly”, but I would say that there is a constant effort. The minister's job basically is in Canada and we have made two major trips to Asia to speak with the Asians, trying to assure them that we have a safe food supply, that our animals are being tested and that our beef is of high quality and meets their demands and concerns.

[Dave Chatters, Conservative, Westlock—St. Paul, AB]

Madam Chair, that is all very well. We all would love to see the American border open and we would love to open new markets in Asia and all the rest of it, but my question is a little different. For many years now in Canada, we have not had an industry to speak of for the slaughter of aged bulls and aged cows. We have shipped them across the line to slaughter, for the most part, in spite of the fact that we import huge amounts of manufacturing beef, baloney, jerky and corned beef.

Why has the government never provided any interest or any incentive to develop an industry in Canada to utilize those cull animals? When the government took a mind to, it certainly did not hesitate to provide incentives to develop an aerospace industry in Montreal or to provide incentives to bring the auto industry into Ontario.

Why is it that the government has never taken the initiative to try to stimulate and create some interest in creating a manufacturing beef industry in Canada so that these baloney bulls and these aged cows are in fact slaughtered in Canada? We would meet the demands of the fast food industry and the demands of the consumer for manufacturing beef and those kinds of products. That has never happened.

I have never been able to understand that. It does not seem to be a priority of the government now. Even in the middle of this crisis, the government certainly is not looking at creating and helping to nurture this industry and get it on its feet.

All the government does is provide a backstop for the chartered banks in Canada to help protect them. It is not doing anything to help entrepreneurs in Canada to take advantage of this opportunity to create a new niche industry in Canada and actually do these things in Canada for Canadian consumers.

[Charles Hubbard, Liberal, Miramichi, NB]

Madam Chair, I think if we look at the history of this we will find that things have happened in terms of where farmers could get the best price for their cull cows and over-age bulls.

Over the past years, during the late 1990s, often the best price for many farmers was in the State of Pennsylvania and on the west coast, often in the State of Washington. With that, in terms of our slaughter capacity being used in this country, farmers were getting the better price elsewhere.

If we were to take that initiative--and I believe there is money on the table in terms of slaughter capacity--our producers would have to guarantee these slaughterhouses that they would have access to their cattle in the future. We as a government and a nation certainly want to promote what the member is suggesting, but in the long run it is important that those slaughterhouses we might create in the short run would have cattle available in the long run.

Second, in terms of the banks, a few years back we saw where the banks offered a better rate of credit than the Farm Credit Corporation, which has been the backbone of our agricultural economy. Many banks loaned money to farmers at a rate lower than Farm Credit did. It appears that as a result of this, today the banks are reaping what they sowed. Our farm credit organization has worked with farmers very closely, but I am not sure how closely some of those banks the member for Acadie—Bathurst mentioned are ready to work with our farmers to make sure they survive this crisis.

[Wayne Easter, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Agriculture and Agri-Food (Rural Development)]

Madam Chair, the member mentioned that he was with a delegation to the United States. The impression seems to be left by the member for Wild Rose that we have not done our work in terms of lobbying in the United States. I wonder if the member could talk about the success of that delegation.

I believe that while we were there the Grocery Manufacturers Association committed itself to try to push to get the door open. Its members are not just grocery manufacturers. They represent the packing industry, et cetera, in the United States. The National Cattlemen's Association is the largest cattlemen's association in the United States. I believe that we met in their boardroom. They agreed to work with us to try to get the border open.

I wonder if the member might give to the House some of the experiences from his trip there to try to have some of the U.S. people work from within, to have them pressure their own political establishment to in fact open the border so the integrated beef industry could work the way it should be working.

[Charles Hubbard, Liberal, Miramichi, NB]

Madam Chair, my colleague of course was with us on that intervention to the United States last March. With it, we were looking forward to the opening of the border. There was talk about a comment period, a period when the Americans would be able to reply to the initiatives of the United States department of agriculture.

It is interesting to note that the United States consumers today are paying a higher price for their beef because of the fact that our beef is not entering their market.

We did have a lot of support in terms of what we heard in Washington, but sad to say, when we looked at some of those who put in comments, some of the leading senators, some of those seeking very high public office in the month ahead, we saw that they were against opening the borders to Canadian cattle.

It was shocking to see the senator for New York State and the two senators from Massachusetts wanting to make sure the border was closed. I hope that in the future they will change their minds, especially if they reach higher office, but it is a concern of mine and a concern of the agricultural community in Canada.

[Diane Finley, Conservative, Haldimand—Norfolk, ON]

Madam Chair, earlier this evening I asked the member across the way what the government's position was on meeting the needs of Quebec. At that time it was suggested, wrongly, that I was looking for special treatment for Quebec.

What was said instead was that the government plan was designed to provide equity to all regions of the country, which is laudable, but I have to admit I am bit confused by that. On Friday, the fed cattle set-aside program was launched. It was announced by the Alberta government, which had already registered its producers as bidders, but the Ontario government to this day has no mechanism by which its producers are registered for the bidding process, a bidding process, I might add, which was launched Thanksgiving Monday morning. This first round closes tomorrow, Wednesday, at noon.

The program was announced on Friday, to start Monday and close at Wednesday noon. A call to Agriculture Canada this morning from an Ontario producer looking for information was redirected to the ministry of agriculture for Ontario. A subsequent call to the Ontario ministry of agriculture yielded nothing but a voice mail with no return call. This producer was trying to sign up for this new program for which producers are at this point eligible only until Wednesday noon.

This is my question for the hon. member. If this is equity or if this is supposed to be an equitable program, how is it that producers in Alberta who have already signed up can take advantage of this program but producers in Ontario cannot?

[The Assistant Deputy Chair]

The member for Miramichi's time is practically up. He has about 30 seconds.

[Charles Hubbard, Liberal, Miramichi, NB]

Madam Chair, I can only reaffirm what I said before. These programs operate in conjunction with the provinces. Negotiations are under way. My own province of New Brunswick, for example, would be much different than either of the two the member mentioned, but it is a matter of the provincial and federal people getting together to develop the program to assist their producers.

[Betty Hinton, Conservative, Kamloops—Thompson, BC]

Madam Chair, I will be splitting my time with my colleague from Haliburton—Kawartha Lakes—Brock.

I rise tonight in this 38th Parliament to speak once again on behalf of both my rural and my urban constituents on the issue of BSE. I would like to take this opportunity to thank the people of Kamloops—Thompson—Cariboo publicly for their vote of confidence in sending me back to be their voice in Ottawa.

Since May 20, 2003 I have spoken often about a specific need not being met by government: a solution to the BSE crisis. The situation is becoming more and more serious with each passing day.

In 2003 there were 28 cattle ranchers that declared bankruptcy. For the first six months of 2004 there have been 32 and one can only imagine what the last six months of the year will bring. These are not just statistics. These are real people who work very hard to make a living. They deserve a government that works equally as hard to ensure their future success.

A live weight steer that would have fetched $1.60 a pound two years ago at auction may get up to 65¢ per pound. That is a huge discrepancy between what was happening before and what is happening now.

Farmers are having to take outside jobs to keep their farms going and that leaves the farms to deteriorate. The feed farmers are not selling their feed because the ranchers simply cannot afford to buy it.

In my own riding we have had a double whammy. We had forest fires last year. There was no production of feed. Everything was burned and we relied on the good graces of the people from Wild Rose county in Alberta to get us through a very tough summer. We are very grateful for that, but we have to look toward the future.

I have told the House before what the impact has been. Independent self-sufficient ranches that have survived for 100 years have suddenly been brought to their knees by a government that is incompetent. What has the government done? The answer is next to nothing, unless we count the excuses, the press releases and the head patting that has gone on which the Liberals think passes for progress.

We are talking about people, livelihoods, lifestyles and the Liberals are talking about covering their backsides. How callous can they possibly get. This is yet another industry in Canada where we can hear the flushing as we speak. We have to do more than we have done to date.

The Liberals talk about a consultation process, but it did not take place. The proof of that lies in the results. The Conservative Party has consulted and it has done so with those who produce. If we want answers and we want to know what the problems are and we want to know what the solutions are, it is imperative that we speak directly to the people who are affected. The government has not done that. It says it has, but it has not.

Those who have been completely overlooked in this disastrous situation, aside from the cattle ranchers, are ranchers who produce other ruminants. It has been 16 months with no recognition from the government side for those people who raise goats, sheep and a variety of other ruminants. Those people have had absolutely no say in their future and have had absolutely no input into what the government is planning to do.

We are not talking about a few dozen head here. We are talking about two million head. To not even discuss this situation with them is very serious.

We have to ask ourselves a question in Canada: Are we going to be independent producers of our own food or are we not? One of my constituents who is a sheep rancher told me that his own son is having second thoughts about carrying on the family tradition. The reason for this is not that he has lost his love for the family ranch; it is that he has lost even the most minuscule amount of faith in a government that has let this happen to his family and to hundreds of thousands of other families.

It is time to wake up. We have to do something fast and we have to do something serious or we are in jeopardy of losing yet another industry in this country. A government that would allow that to happen is not fit to govern.

[Paul Steckle, Liberal, Huron—Bruce, ON]

Mr. Chair, I listened with attentive ears to what the hon. member had to say.

It is fair to say that we have a right to pass judgment but judgment should be passed on fact. I heard the member say that there was next to no help from the government. If $1 billion is next to no help, then we should be prepared to ask our farmers to give it back and we will give it to the small industries, the small companies and businesses that are going bankrupt every day. There is no government help whatsoever for the farm machinery dealer who goes down as a result of this industry. People in my area are going bankrupt.

The Huron portion of my riding probably represents the largest in terms of dollar revenue return in agriculture than any riding in Canada east of Winnipeg. When the Bruce portion is taken in, it becomes considerably larger. I know what I am talking about. People in my riding are hurting. Their loans are being called in by the banks.

On no consultation, I can assure the member that there has been a lot of consultation. I can assure her that every member in the House has done some consultation. It is not only fair to pass judgment on this side of the House but perhaps on hon. members of the other opposition parties as well. I am sure they would agree with me.

The member said that we do not know what farmers want. I think we know what they want. If the results of going to the United States would be as positive as what we are being led to believe by some of the members tonight, then what are the results of the visits of the premier of Alberta to the United States? He has been there at least twice that I know of. It has been well publicized and is well known throughout this country that he has gone to make those kinds of requests to the United States and the politicians south of the border that would open the doors, but the doors have not yet been opened. There has been a lot of effort made by a lot of people, all sincere I am sure, but the result is exactly the same.

As my hon. colleague mentioned a few moments ago, there are those in elected office in the United States who want to see the borders remain closed. In the United States the organization R-CALF wants the borders kept closed. These are farmers. Convince our farmers that we have not done anything. The member had better talk to some of the farmers in the Huron--Bruce riding.

[Betty Hinton, Conservative, Kamloops—Thompson, BC]

Mr. Chair, it is nice to see such passion at this time of the evening. I wish that passion had been there when we needed it, at the very beginning of this crisis when we could have perhaps done something about it.

My colleague and I represent 70% of the ranchers in British Columbia. They are independent people. They are hardworking people who never ask for help. No matter what the weather is like, no matter what the conditions are, no matter what is happening in their families, they have a job to do and they do it without complaint.

The fault lies with the government. The government did not do enough at the very beginning. In my opinion, it has not done enough since the crisis hit to save these people's livelihoods. The government brought them to their knees. Some ranches have been in my riding for over 100 years. Ranchers have now been brought to their knees, not through their own incompetence, not through something they did, but through something over which they had absolutely no control. It was in the hands of government. This problem has been mishandled from the beginning.

I am not standing here tonight to bash the government. I am standing here tonight to tell the House that I want a cooperative effort made to open the borders and to save an industry that is in dire jeopardy.

[Paul Steckle, Liberal, Huron—Bruce, ON]

Give credit where credit is due.

[Betty Hinton, Conservative, Kamloops—Thompson, BC]

This is serious. The member can heckle me all he wants.

I stand here because I represent 100,000-plus people in my riding who are seriously hurting. I am sorry for the things that are going on in other people's ridings. If they are suffering, they have my sympathy. If you want my support to make it better for your riding, you have it. I am standing here tonight asking for your support for an industry that is in jeopardy because the government has failed miserably. The cost of that is not going to be on the shoulders of the government. It is going to be on the shoulders of families who have worked for years in an industry that you are helping to destroy.

My riding has been faced with all kinds of things. The government dropped the ball on softwood lumber. That killed a whole bunch of industries in my community. It killed a whole bunch of families' incomes. Now you are killing the cattle ranching industry but it is not just cattle ranches. I told you what has happened to sheep producers, goat producers and many other producers. Stop being adversarial in the House--

[The Chair]

The time has expired. I remind all hon. members to make their remarks through the Chair during the debate.