Mr. Speaker, I take offence to that question. There is no reason that the hon. member should suggest that farmers in the west are not bright enough to understand those three simple questions. I think that most of my constituents would find it quite offensive. They are three simple statements . I will read them one more time. Perhaps I should read them very slowly so the hon. member for Malpeque can actually understand them.
The Canadian Wheat Board should retain the single desk for the marketing of barley into domestic human consumption and export markets.
That is option number one.
I [as a farmer] would like the option to market my barley to the Canadian Wheat Board or any other domestic or foreign buyer.
That is option number two. That is great.
The Canadian Wheat Board should not have a role in the marketing of barley.
That is option number three.
Some farmers will choose option three because of the years of frustration. The leg iron marks on their ankles perhaps would be enough of a reason for them to vote for option number three. The most important point is they are clear, concise questions that I think any farmer would be completely able to understand.
I should tell members I have actually filled out my ballot and returned it. It did not take me long. The language was quite clear. I am not sure why the hon. member for Malpeque cannot understand clear choice language.