House of Commons Hansard #50 of the 39th Parliament, 2nd Session. (The original version is on Parliament's site.) The word of the day was producers.

Topics

Livestock IndustryEmergency Debate

9:15 p.m.

Conservative

David Anderson Conservative Cypress Hills—Grasslands, SK

Mr. Speaker, if the member wants to look, he can see that the apparent PMO notes are written in my own handwriting.

I would like to address his issue about the Minister of International Trade, because what has struck me about our caucus, and particularly our cabinet, is the way that people are able to work together. The Minister of International Trade and the Minister of Agriculture have a great respect for each other and are able to work together on these files. I know that is something NDP members do not understand because they will never form the government of this country. They do not need to even try to understand that, because they will never have to deal with it.

That has been one of the great things about working with this group of people on this side of the House in our caucus. It is the way that we work together and the way we work together to represent the interests of western Canadians and the rest of Canada's agricultural producers.

Livestock IndustryEmergency Debate

9:20 p.m.

Conservative

The Acting Speaker Conservative Royal Galipeau

The hon. member for Lethbridge has 30 seconds.

Livestock IndustryEmergency Debate

9:20 p.m.

Conservative

Rick Casson Conservative Lethbridge, AB

Thank you, Mr. Speaker, but it takes me 30 seconds just to get to my feet.

There are all kinds of things that need to be brought into play here when we are talking about cash payments and programs, but I would like my colleague to allude to some of the other things that need to be done or looked at. I think our government is doing that as far as regulation, harmonization and some of the other obstacles the hog and beef sectors are facing are concerned. I would like him to give a short response.

Livestock IndustryEmergency Debate

9:20 p.m.

Conservative

David Anderson Conservative Cypress Hills—Grasslands, SK

The main thing, Mr. Speaker, as far as the government is concerned, is that we have a world class agricultural industry in this country and that the regulatory system is a good system and convenient for agricultural producers to use.

I do not have a lot of time to talk about this, but we have been moving in the direction of trying to make sure that the regulatory system works for our producers. We have tried to simplify it from the complicated mess that was left for us in--

Livestock IndustryEmergency Debate

9:20 p.m.

Conservative

The Acting Speaker Conservative Royal Galipeau

Resuming debate. The hon. member for Thunder Bay--Rainy River.

Livestock IndustryEmergency Debate

9:20 p.m.

Liberal

Ken Boshcoff Liberal Thunder Bay—Rainy River, ON

Mr. Speaker, I will be splitting my time with the hon. member for Madawaska—Restigouche.

The fact that we are having an emergency debate tonight, 12 days after black Friday, only confirms that the Conservative minority has failed to respond positively to the plight of the hog and cattle industries.

I am calling the government's bluff on its so-called December aid package. If it was so helpful, why are farmers calling it a “cruel joke”? And why is the money not in their hands right now?

It is absolutely remarkable that in so many parts of the country constituencies that supported the Conservative Party have now found themselves abandoned.

If anyone criticizes the government, with their quite reasonable concerns, then doors are slammed in their faces and they are threatened with subtle retaliation by a vindictive Prime Minister.

To go back to the adjournment proceedings in Hansard of January 29, 2008, I asked the parliamentary secretary to explain “the absence of the federal minister in this crisis” and asked why there was not yet any “compassionate response”. He gave the PMO's stock horse manure response that all was well and that farmers were getting financial aid in the billions.

When we listen to the Conservatives talk about trotting out all the money for ground squirrels, it is quite clear that they have stopped listening to farmers.

On January 31, the Standing Committee on Agriculture and Agri-Food received the pork and cattle industry representatives who calmly, professionally, and yes sadly, told the story of their catastrophic losses.

If anyone wanted an exposé of the cruel jokes the Conservatives are pulling on the farmers of Canada, I would ask them to please reference the committee Hansard for Thursday, January 31, 2008. It is all right there. They will read about Conservative members calling desperate cattle farmers “wishy-washy”. Imagine people coming to Ottawa to remind the government of its promise to help them and instead being ridiculed.

I believe firmly in the independent farm. I believe that they produce good, secure, safe, quality food for Canadian families and themselves. I believe that the rural lifestyle is a worthy and honourable way of living that contributes mightily to our great nation.

Therefore, as a believer in the family farm, it breaks my heart to hear about the Conservative abandonment, but just as emotionally, it ticks me off something fierce. The Conservatives have made me and thousands of farmers righteously angry.

The agriculture committee made several positive recommendations. Numerous farm groups, provincial and federal, all over this country, have made very positive and practical solutions. These suggestions have yet to be acted upon.

Why, on Valentine's Day eve, is the massacre of Canadian agriculture being allowed to proceed?

Listening to that con job is way too much. The government is taking our farmers for granted. Farmers know they are being scammed while their neighbours are going bankrupt. This is shameful and disgusting.

The Prime Minister can go around making repeat announcements, but in the farmers' eyes he will be remembered as Canada's cruellest Prime Minister ever.

I will now read from that committee Hansard because it is better from an objective standpoint that we really get a feel for what went on.

The Canadian Cattlemen's Association said:

We were here two months ago, and unfortunately I think there are very few bankable results that we can report on. We'd hoped to give you a progress report; I think the progress report is pretty thin, and that's unfortunate.

The association went on to say:

--producers were expecting a lot more, and I think it has fallen far short of what was expected.

Unfortunately because of this absence of federal action, we have seen both Alberta and Ontario move out on their own.

From the Canadian Pork Council, Mr. Steven Moffet said:

I don't have to tell you guys that aside from the economic activity we're losing, these are farm families who are losing their livelihoods. There are employees who have worked on these farms who have to go looking for something else to do. This is a devastating situation, and we all know that. That is why we've asked for something to deal with the liquidity.

Again, the pork council stated:

Let me be clear that the December 19th response was a cruel joke to many of our producers. There were false hopes and false assumptions and false expectations that simply weren't deliverable. The dollars are there but currently not available to help us through the process

The cattlemen stated:

If somebody thinks the problem's solved and the money's flowing, they might want to come out to Saskatchewan. I could perhaps introduce them to some producers.

The pork council stated further:

My response is very simple: the time to talk is over; the time to deliver is now. Talking doesn't help us anymore. The direction needs to come from the political side down. We've been working with the bureaucrats for about two to two and a half months, and I think they're very clear on our position and our understanding.

Numerous examples go on for pages and pages. Six days before Christmas farm and agriculture groups were told they would be helped. They went through the process. Two months later and there still has been no action.

We hear that all kinds of programs have been announced, but these people need something else. They need hard cash. We know how good the industry is. We know it can compete with anyone in the world. We know our families, whether they are urban or rural, very much appreciate the agricultural communities and our independent farms.

When we make this case, I wish the rhetoric would stop and the minister would start to write the cheques. We know what is needed. Farmers know what is needed. The pork council knows what is needed. The cattlemen's association knows what is needed.

The fact that the provinces have to pick the ball up for us is an embarrassing thing. We should be there front and centre. We should not be waiting and debating whether it is a long term solution. They will not be around in the long term if we do not act now.

Very kindly, I ask the government to respond, stop with the invective and the cruelty and address the situation of the pork and beef industry.

Livestock IndustryEmergency Debate

9:25 p.m.

Conservative

Rick Casson Conservative Lethbridge, AB

Mr. Speaker, some of the comments concentrate on the cashflow aspect and the financial transfer of funds to the industry. That is needed and it is happening. Some say it is not fast enough and that could be true, but it is something the government is seized with and it something we have tried to expedite as quickly as we can.

However, there is another aspect we have to consider, and I will ask the member opposite for his thoughts on this. It is not only the issue of the programs and the cash. The issue is to look at the how the hog and beef industries have been structured over the last number of years and to allow producers to be creative and to come forward with ideas on how to fix these two industries in the long term. A lot can be done.

Certainly we have to keep in mind the other aspect of it, but that is not the only thing. There has to be an end game. An industry has to be created, which is sustainable over the long period. We have to engage producers in a way that they are the creative people who can come forward with the answers.

Does the member opposite have a comment on what his party would do to allow that to happen? I know we have done a lot on this side of the House to increase research in grain production, to allow more grain to feed cattle and hogs. We are looking at harmonization and reducing the burden of regulation.

Therefore, could the member comment on some of those ideas?

Livestock IndustryEmergency Debate

9:30 p.m.

Liberal

Ken Boshcoff Liberal Thunder Bay—Rainy River, ON

Mr. Speaker, we know the answer to the immediate solution is the liquidity.

The Standing Committee on Agriculture and Agri-Food gave its response, five or six major things that should have been done already. The Ontario Federation of Agriculture had a 12-point program. The Canadian Federation of Agriculture, the Canadian Cattlemen's Association, the Canadian Pork Council, the Ontario Pork Industry Council, all these people provided us with the solutions, 60, 70, 80 days ago, as to what we should do.

We are still hearing their appeals. Reliance on current programs is the fallback that the government has used. In all fairness, I appreciate the way the question was asked, but there is an immediacy that is past urgency. People are on their knees. They are throwing the keys in. They are walking into the banks and telling them to take them. They cannot keep selling them for $50 or $100 less than what they for them.

People are hurting. There is not a large pork or cattle industry where I live, but it is important. People are desperate. I fail to grasp why the government will not respond with the sense of urgency and passion required. These are very reasonable people. Members would know them from the associations I mentioned. They frequently come to see us at the agriculture committee. They are on the Hill all the time. Their knees are worn out from begging.

We have to do more and we had to do it yesterday. I believe there is a future. When members ask me what my party has done, I am proud to say we have driven this agenda. We got the standing committee to make that report. We sent it to Parliament. We gave the solutions a long time ago. They should not be sitting on the minister's desk.

The government members can do one thing, and that is phone the minister right now. Ask him why he has not acted. The minister cannot hide from these people. They are hurting.

Livestock IndustryEmergency Debate

9:30 p.m.

Liberal

Jean-Claude D'Amours Liberal Madawaska—Restigouche, NB

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to rise this evening to take part in this emergency debate on the cattle industry. My remarks will focus on the beef industry.

Even in this technological age, agriculture remains the backbone of this country's economy. Our country was born when farming started. The farming sector and our farmers are facing many challenges, and not only in the beef industry. Let us be clear on that.

This industry which so desperately needs help is faced with an insensitive government that is showing absolutely no willingness to help our farmers. Worse yet, and I will get into it later, it is laughing in their face when it says it will try to give them extraordinary assistance. The Conservatives had said that farmers would be seeing help and that it would save them.

The reality is quite different. I will get into some very embarrassing tidbits about the Conservatives later on.

Earlier, I said that agriculture and agricultural producers are facing numerous challenges, and have been for several years. I think everyone agrees on that. However, their income has not been increasing. There has not been much improvement since before the BSE crisis. Before the crisis, people were making good money, or at least, more than they are making now. All of the Conservatives' promises and pretty words do not put more money in farmer's pockets when they sell their livestock. It would not be truthful to pretend otherwise. Incomes have dropped by 60% to 70%. There has been no improvement since then. The Conservatives claim that the crisis is over, that everything is fine, and that they are handing out cheques to boot. However, incomes have not gone up; they have gone down, and as surely as incomes have gone down, expenses have gone up.

I will give a few examples of rising costs. There are many examples to choose from. Think of the incredible increase in the price of fuel, of diesel. The government is not doing anything to help our agricultural producers. The cost of cattle feed is rising. The cost of electricity is rising. We do not live in the south, so we have to heat our barns and buildings to make sure our animals do not have any problems. And there is so much more.

One of the worst problems Canadian agricultural producers, particularly those in my riding, are facing is foreign competition. That is probably one of the worst problems. It is hard to compete on a level playing field when people are not being treated fairly.

I heard the Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Natural Resources and for the Canadian Wheat Board say earlier that the quality in Canada is superior to that found south of the border. If it is superior in Canada—and I agree it is—why is it that we allow meat and animals to enter Canada from elsewhere, from the south, where the quality is inferior? This means that our farmers cannot play on a level playing field. Who is allowing this? The government opposite is. They boast that the Canadian product is better, yet they allow animals of inferior quality to enter the country. Who will pay? The consumer will pay, but that is not a problem. Who will pay the price in the end? Our farmers will.

If I were a Conservative member listening here this evening, I would be embarrassed, simply because the government is spouting rhetoric.

The government tells farmers that it is there for them. It announces funding. It asks farmers to vote for them, telling them they will see how the government plans to help them. Yet we have seen proof of the opposite. I hope the members across the floor will be embarrassed here this evening.

I would like to give the example of a farmer in my riding, Madawaska—Restigouche. I recently had the opportunity to sit down with him. He feels he is being made a fool of. I challenge any Conservative member, minister or parliamentary secretary to tell me that they are doing anything positive.

On March 9, 2007, with great fanfare, the Prime Minister announced $1 billion for Canadian farmers. The government's press release talked about a national agricultural income stabilization program, and I quote the Prime Minister of Canada:

Our government is taking another step forward towards replacing the Canadian Agricultural Income Stabilization Program with programming that is more predictable, bankable and better enables farmers to better respond to rising costs.

I spoke earlier about rising costs. Consider the example of that farmer in my riding: he own approximately 225 head of cattle and he recently received a cheque for $55.04. The Conservative government should be ashamed of itself for trying to say that it wants to help farmers.

The Conservatives are boasting to farmers about the $1 billion program they have introduced. But what are people in my riding getting? They are getting 26¢ a head. The government should be ashamed to send a cheque like that to that farmer. It is shameful to pay someone 26¢ a head.

How do you think our farmers are going to survive? The Conservatives can keep on telling us that everything is fine. The parliamentary secretary to the Minister of Natural Resources even dared to say earlier that his government was proud to announce that program. I wonder whether, in his response, he will tell me that he is still just as proud of that program, when farmers with 225 head of livestock are getting 26¢—not $26, $260 or $2,600, but 26¢—a head to help them get through the crisis.

As I said earlier, if I were a Conservative member, I would be ashamed to hear that tonight. I would talk to the Minister of Agriculture and Agri-Food and I would talk to the Prime Minister about the announcement he made on March 9, 2007 in Saskatoon. If the Prime Minister's announcement is not his way of thumbing his nose at our farmers, at the people who are the backbone of one of the largest economies in the country, then I do not know what it is.

I can assure you that this is just one example. Some people have decided not even to register for government programs any more, because they get absolutely nothing out of them. Filling out the paperwork costs more than the paltry cheque for $55.04 that they get.

I am anxious to hear what the government members will ask me. When we talk about an emergency debate, it is because there is an emergency. Our farmers need help. Where is the government? Nowhere. Does the government want to take positive steps? No. It is finding excuses and not coming up with solutions for our farmers. Despite all the fine speeches and lovely promises, the government is offering no real solutions and absolutely nothing to help our farmers get through the crisis.

Livestock IndustryEmergency Debate

9:40 p.m.

Conservative

Leon Benoit Conservative Vegreville—Wainwright, AB

Mr. Speaker, I listened to the speech by the Liberal member and heard a lot of rhetoric. What did the member suggest in terms of solutions? He suggested more, more, more. He did not say what. He did not say how. He just said more.

We are in a very serious situation. It is caused by many things including: the increasing dollar, which brings down the price immediately, 20% or more, from what it was about a year ago; an increase in input costs, a lot of it feed cost due to the grain sector finally getting decent prices; and low market prices.

Why are market prices low other than the dollar? They are low because there are too many animals in the market and too many animals being produced, in this case particularly in North America.

Those are the three things that have caused this perfect storm that is extremely unusual and has made things so difficult for farmers to deal with. The cattlemen and hog producers we are talking about are not just people out there somewhere. They are my neighbours, my friends and my constituents.

The member calls for more, but I would like the Liberal member to say specifically what he would do. His government had 13 years to fix these problems and it did not do it. I would like to ask the member specifically, what would he do to solve this problem?

Livestock IndustryEmergency Debate

9:45 p.m.

Liberal

Jean-Claude D'Amours Liberal Madawaska—Restigouche, NB

Mr. Speaker, first, if I understood correctly, in his question the member opposite just said there are too many animals. Does that mean—perhaps he will have the chance to respond—that he or his government would like there to be fewer farms and that farmers should give up their livelihood? Is that what that means?

That is what the Conservatives are saying: the industry must manage itself and resolve its little problems itself. He just said there are too many animals right now. That is almost like saying that some farms have to disappear. It is disgraceful to try to insinuate such things.

The Conservatives have been in power for over two years now and they are presenting a program that gives my producers 26¢ per head of cattle. That is the government's program. The government is bragging that everything is going well and that it is giving a lot. Can the government tell me this: is 26¢ per head of cattle a lot?

Livestock IndustryEmergency Debate

9:45 p.m.

NDP

Nathan Cullen NDP Skeena—Bulkley Valley, BC

Mr. Speaker, I am impressed by the energy of the member but not necessarily the details of his solutions. I have one to suggest both to the government and to the official opposition, when it chooses to take that role.

In meeting with farmers from across my region, Fraser Lake, Houston, Burns Lake and beyond, they are struggling to make ends meet. I am talking about the family farms, not the big mega corporation farms but the folks who are trying to make things connect.

The price of getting cows to market, talking about beef for a moment, is out of control. SRM costs are going from $40 to $80 a head and folks cannot bring cows to market and still make ends meet for the feed and cost of production.

I am curious as to the member's and government member's opinions on this. As a solution, we could at least bring in country of origin labelling for all beef brought into the country. We talk about there being too many cows on the market and too much beef on the market, yet we import enormous numbers while Canadian farmers have a hard time getting value for product.

I am wondering if the member would allow that the same regulations being imposed on Canadian farmers for safety reasons should also be imposed on every importer of product to Canada. That is not the case at the moment and I think Canadian consumers, as well as producers, at least deserve solutions that look like this. I would like the member's opinion on these exact and particular solutions to this crisis that we are facing right now.

Livestock IndustryEmergency Debate

9:45 p.m.

Liberal

Jean-Claude D'Amours Liberal Madawaska—Restigouche, NB

Mr. Speaker, I do not have much time. I thank my colleague for his question. In my opinion, generally speaking, it would be good for Canadians to know that they are buying Canadian products and, when it is a Canadian product, that they know exactly where it came from.

We do not need to keep repeating ourselves all the time in the House of Commons. My colleague from Malpeque mentioned this very clearly and presented eight recommendations earlier this evening. I believe those recommendations were presented in committee, therefore—

Livestock IndustryEmergency Debate

9:45 p.m.

Conservative

Livestock IndustryEmergency Debate

9:45 p.m.

Lotbinière—Chutes-de-la-Chaudière Québec

Conservative

Jacques Gourde ConservativeParliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Labour and Minister of the Economic Development Agency of Canada for the Regions of Quebec

Mr. Speaker, first of all, I will be sharing my time with my colleague from Vegreville—Wainwright.

I am pleased to have this opportunity to talk about the significant steps taken by our Conservative government to ensure the prosperity and sustainable development of the Canadian livestock industry.

It is not difficult for the Bloc to request an emergency debate. In any event, that is all it is capable of doing. Action has been taken by this side of the House and we are proud of the work being done right now on behalf of all Canadian producers.

Our government is guided by a fundamental principle in developing each of its agricultural programs and policies. This principle is simple but important: put farmers first. When farmers prosper, the entire agricultural community of rural Canada prospers. Our Conservative government knows full well that although there are many challenges facing the livestock industry, there are also many opportunities. It is at that level that we can say that we deliver the goods. We do not need any lessons from anyone in this House, especially not the Bloc, which is destined to never do anything for agriculture.

On the international scene, our government is working very hard, day after day, to find new markets for Canadian products and to maximize our position in our current markets. I thank my colleagues on this side of the House, as well as my industry colleagues for their excellent work in that regard. Our government realizes that access to international markets is vital to the economic success of Canadian livestock products and livestock producers.

The world knows that our livestock products and our genetics products are the best in the world. The same goes for our finished products and breeding stock. Fortunately, we are here so the world can benefit. Our government is working very hard to help these products reach international markets.

We are the ones who did everything possible to protect and improve access to the American market and to other important markets for our country's livestock producers. We are actively engaged in fighting the latest bid by R-CALF to close the border, since it is important to protect our producers. We worked hard to get Canada full access to the Philippine beef market and partial access for Canadian beef exporters to the markets in Japan, Hong Kong, Taiwan, Indonesia and Russia. Furthermore, we are working non-stop to resume beef exports to the Korean and Chinese markets.

Moreover, our government has an ambitious negotiation program for developing bilateral free trade agreements. Canada is currently negotiating free trade agreements with a number of major markets for exporting Canadian beef and pork to Korea, Latin America and the Caribbean, in particular.

Our objective is to maintain and improve the competitiveness of our beef and pork exporters on these markets by removing tariff barriers to the export of Canadian products.

I am pleased to point out that, in November, the Minister of Agriculture and Agri-Food met in Brussels with his counterparts from the United States, India, Japan and the European Union. In January, our minister went to Mexico, where, at every opportunity, he tried to maximize market access for Canadian cattle producers. That is what I call good work on the part of our government. At every one of these meetings, the minister was proud and pleased to hear all the good people had to say about world renowned Canadian livestock products.

Our government knows that the promotion of animal health in Canada is a foundation for success on export markets. That principle is at the heart of our food safety, agricultural and international trade policies.

The Canadian Food Inspection Agency plays a pivotal role in our country's efforts to ensure the safety of our food and the health of the animals and plants on which we rely to be sure that our food is safe. We are proud of the science-based work of the agency, which is recognized worldwide.

The agency works in cooperation with national and international authorities to prevent and limit the spread of animal diseases, and ensure that international trade policies are based on sound and current science. Science-based policies are essential to trade. We all got confirmation of that with BSE.

When the crisis hit, borders all over the world started being closed to Canadian beef, cattle and meat products, with disastrous consequences for Canadian producers. I think that even the Bloc Québécois and the NDP will agree that the actions taken by the government of the day to repair the prejudice were inadequate. Recently, however, thanks to the hard work and determination of this Conservative government, dozens of countries have now reopened their borders to Canadian beef. As I said earlier, Russia and the Philippines recently reopened their borders to Canadian beef and, more importantly for our producers, on November 19, the United States gave the green light for Canadian beef to start coming across their border again. The industry is the first to recognize that this was the result of excellent work on the part of this Conservative government.

A highlight of this process was when Canada was officially categorized as a controlled risk country by the International Office Epizootics. This is yet another example which shows that the hard work done by the agency and by our government produces results for Canadian livestock producers across the country. That recognition is an endorsement of the measures implemented by our government to eradicate BSE in Canada. This remarkable recovery after the BSE crisis is testimony to our government's sound policies and initiatives.

Investing in science and innovation is another means used by our government to build a strong foundation for our producers, and it is a priority that was non-existent under previous governments. Through strategic investments in that sector, we are helping build a prosperous future for our producers and for the whole agricultural sector. Innovation is the key to helping producers innovate and seize new opportunities. We are there to help them.

Livestock IndustryEmergency Debate

9:55 p.m.

Liberal

Wayne Easter Liberal Malpeque, PE

Mr. Speaker, I listened closely to the member and he went to great lengths to talk about what the Conservatives are doing in finding markets. I do not know if he heard earlier, but I did say to the House that thank goodness the previous Liberal minister had laid the groundwork or that crew over there would still be looking on the map to find the countries where they would be marketing to.

We on this side of the House do welcome new markets, but the problem today and the problem since December has not been new markets in an isolated sense. The problem is liquidity on the farm. Farmers are going broke. They are not going to be around by the time those new markets the member is talking about arrive. Do the folks on the other side not understand that? Farmers need money in their pockets to give them the liquidity to get through this tough period until prices start to improve.

Let me compare the two notes, because maybe we are crossing wires here. The Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Agriculture on January 29 talked about the agri-invest program and the kickstart program, which the Conservatives have announced a total of about seven times. He said in his concluding remarks, “That money is flowing toward cattle and hog sectors as we speak”. My colleague said earlier that it amounts to 25¢ a head. Is that the money he is talking about, 25¢ a head?

Livestock IndustryEmergency Debate

10 p.m.

Conservative

Jacques Gourde Conservative Lotbinière—Chutes-de-la-Chaudière, QC

Mr. Speaker, I would like to remind the House of the 13 years of Liberal government, during which 75,000 Canadian farms were lost. That is over 25% of all Canadian farms. The Liberals should be ashamed of their performance.

This year alone, we anticipate that close to $1.5 billion will be invested in programs. That money will be distributed to Canadian livestock producers. These are concrete measures for the current year and, more importantly, it is more than what the Liberals may have offered to Canadian producers.

Livestock IndustryEmergency Debate

10 p.m.

Bloc

André Bellavance Bloc Richmond—Arthabaska, QC

Mr. Speaker, we are indebted to the member for Lotbinière—Chutes-de-la-Chaudière for the speech he gave during this emergency debate on the crisis in the pork and beef industries. There will probably be an election campaign soon. I intend to print the member for Lotbinière—Chutes-de-la-Chaudière's speech and pass it around to everyone in the agricultural sector.

For minutes that seemed to stretch into hours, he said over and over that everything is fine, everything has been fixed, all of which was much the same as what we heard from the Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Agriculture and Agri-Food. According to the member, the Conservative government has gone to great lengths to avert the crisis. So why are we having this debate tonight? That is my question for the member. Why are we having this debate? I can help him answer that question.

During committee meetings, a unanimous report was drafted. Members of his party were among those who signed the unanimous report with its six specific recommendations. Beef and pork producers told us that they were experiencing an unprecedented crisis. Perhaps the member is not aware that the dollar has gone up. That is one of the factors contributing to the hard times these producers are going through. The people who met with us in committee proposed solutions. I would like the member to talk about that during his remaining time. During his 10-minute speech, nothing he said acknowledged these problems at all.

Livestock IndustryEmergency Debate

10 p.m.

Conservative

Jacques Gourde Conservative Lotbinière—Chutes-de-la-Chaudière, QC

Mr. Speaker, I hope that he will be pleased to print my speech, because on this side, we take concrete action to help Canadian livestock producers, as opposed to the Bloc Québécois, who can only talk. After 17 years of existence, it has never been able to invest one single dollar in Canadian agriculture. What a shame!

The Bloc Québécois is completely useless for agriculture and for Quebec farmers. The member can print my speech if he likes and show it to all his colleagues and his friends in agriculture. They will be able to sort it out at the next election.

Livestock IndustryEmergency Debate

10 p.m.

Conservative

Leon Benoit Conservative Vegreville—Wainwright, AB

Mr. Speaker, in one way, I would like to say that I am pleased to take part in this debate, but in another way I am not. I wish the need were not there to have an emergency debate on the cattle and hog industries, but the reality is the problem is there. I want to start by talking about why the problem is there. There are three or four main reasons.

First, our dollar has increased over the last year by roughly 20%, which means that prices are roughly 20% less. That in itself would cause a crisis in any industry, I would suggest.

Second, the input costs have gone up dramatically, especially feed costs, the reason being that grain prices, finally, have improved. Grain farmers are finally getting a decent price for their grain, but that causes severe problems in the livestock sector. That problem is right around the world, except that in the United States with corn as a feedstock, they can be a lot more competitive and that causes some real competition problems.

Third, this all happens at a time when market prices are particularly low. Why are market prices low? They are low because the number of hogs and the number of cattle, particularly in North America, are simply too high. There are too many of them.

These things together have caused what many cattlemen and hog producers are calling a perfect storm. It is a very difficult situation, indeed. All of this is at a time when our farmers really do not have the opportunity to compete on an equal footing with many other countries because of unfair trade restrictions. Our government has been working hard on that, but we have not solved the problem. It will take time. In fact, it will take a lot of time to fully deal with that issue, but that certainly does add to the difficulty.

All of this is at a time when the cattle industry, for example, went through a serious drought in 2002 in western Canada causing great difficulties. Feed costs went up. There was not enough feed. In 2003 the BSE mess hit. At that time the industry already was in a lot of trouble. Here we are just a few years later, we have not even successfully dealt with the problems from 2002 and 2003, and this other problem has hit. That is the problem.

What are the solutions? I have not heard a lot of solutions from any of the other parties. I have heard some solutions from the government. I want to talk about what are not solutions to this problem. Here is what we cannot do.

We cannot make a per head payment of any kind, as some members, including the Liberal member for Malpeque, have suggested. We cannot do that for two reasons.

The first reason is that we would be breaking trade rules. What would that mean? In Alberta, for example, where over half of our production of hogs and cattle are exported, that would mean we would no longer have a market for that half of our production. What would that do to the industry right across the country? It would be devastating, indeed. We do not need solutions that are going to make the problem worse.

Even without these trade rules; let us say that we had not come to a time when we had signed the free trade agreement or the WTO or any of the other agreements that we have signed since; let us say that we are before that time. If we made a per head payment in a situation like this, where the number of animals on the farm is already too high, what would that do? That would send a signal to farmers to hang on to their hogs and cattle. That would prolong the problem. It is not a solution to the problem.

I started farming in 1974. In 1975 my neighbours and friends were in a real mess in the cattle industry, much like now. What did the government of the day do? It gave a large per head payment, and it was even larger in Quebec making the problem even worse there. The government made a large per head payment for farmers to hang on to their cattle. That was the government's solution.

It was an unbelievably stupid solution because farmers did what these payments encouraged them to do, they held on to the cows. As a result, the number of animals on the farm were not reduced as they had to be to deal with the problem. The problem could only be dealt with by reducing the number of animals on the farm.

That per head payment destroyed the cattle industry right across this country. It took 10 years for the industry to build it back again. By 1985, we had a healthy cattle industry again and the reason is government got out of it.

We had almost free trade with our neighbour to the south, the United States, in cattle. We never had restrictions in cattle. As a result, the cattle industry blossomed and bloomed and improved, and it was a good industry. There were some ups and downs, as there always is in any agriculture sector, but it was a good industry until 2002. Then the drought hit, followed by the BSE mess.

That goes to show what can happen if we allow markets to work in as free a market environment as we can.

That is what we cannot do, and we will not do that. Hog producers and cattle producers do not want us to do that. I have been told that very clearly. So, what can we do? I would suggest there are three things that government can do, along with farmers.

The first is to make loans available, as soon as possible.

The second is to work hard and fast, and this is for a long term solution, not so much for right now, and reduce unfair trade barriers, and to increase and improve markets. We have certainly been doing that.

The third is to do some things which will help drop input prices. Now, in this case I do not think we would want to drop feed prices because it certainly is not good for the grain farmers. So, there is always a problem with that.

However, there are many other things that we can do to reduce prices, such as a deal with harmonizing regulations between Canada and the United States and so on. Our government has worked hard and done a lot to do that.

As well, we can do things like something that I personally have been working on for almost 10 years: return products to farmers or make available to farmers at as reasonable a price as possible products which will either cause them to increase production or reduce costs.

The particular example I am talking about is that which was laughed at by a colleague across the floor earlier, which is to return to farmers an effective means of controlling gophers. In this case, liquid strychnine, which they can mix with their grain on their own and effectively control these pests which in parts of the country have destroyed quarter sections of pasture land and grain land, costing farmers $200 million to $500 million a year.

Those are the types of things we can do and must continue to do. We certainly have done that. I want to give some specifics, though.

Here is what we have done and I think we have done all we can do within the trade restrictions when it comes to actually delivering money to farmers. We are doing that through improved programs, for example, through an agri-invest kickstart program, benefits worth $600 million, and $160 million of that has gone, and will continue to go, to the cattle and hog sectors. As well, hog and cattle farmers can expect to receive about $1.5 billion.

Livestock IndustryEmergency Debate

10:05 p.m.

Some hon. members

Oh, oh!

Livestock IndustryEmergency Debate

10:10 p.m.

Conservative

Leon Benoit Conservative Vegreville—Wainwright, AB

The members across the floor are sloughing that off.

Under the trade rules that is all we can do. I want to be clear about this. Our government has done more than any other government has done before.

Second, our government has done more than any other party in this House would ever do. Why is that? The reason is we have farmers in our caucus. About a third of our caucus is made up of people who either farm now or are involved in a farm now or have been involved in a farm in a serious way in their lifetime.

So, we would expect our caucus and our government to understand agriculture and to deal with problems. That is what we are doing and that is what we are going to continue to do.

We have started to deliver the loans I talked about earlier. I know it is not fast enough. It never is. Programs are never going to solve the problem either. But we have done all we can do. We are delivering those loans as fast as we can. The provinces are working with us.

We have started the job and we are going to get the job done. We are going to get it done for farmers. We are going to get it done for Canadians. That is how we act. We are going to continue to do that.

Livestock IndustryEmergency Debate

10:10 p.m.

Liberal

Lloyd St. Amand Liberal Brant, ON

Mr. Speaker, I listened carefully to the speech from the member opposite. He started in a fairly articulate fashion describing the perfect storm that is facing livestock producers.

He talked about some of the very difficult factors which they are facing and the very high price of grain. He talked about the high value of the Canadian dollar. He seems to have convinced himself that he realized the gravity of the problem and then he said toward the end of his remarks that his government had basically done all that it is prepared to do.

I do not know to what extent the member opposite is really informed about the very difficult situation that livestock producers, particular pork producers, are facing. I do not know whether he heard, for instance, Clare Schlegel of the Canadian Pork Council make a presentation at committee. I do not know if he has heard or read what Curtis Littlejohn of the Ontario Pork Council said about the very difficult straits in which this sector finds itself. It is in unprecedented difficult straits.

He did talk about the highs and lows. Livestock producers are at the very low point of their farming careers, the very lowest point that many of them have faced, and with which they are now having to deal. The government needs to do more on an immediate basis. I am asking the member opposite, when is more going to flow by way of loans to these producers?

Livestock IndustryEmergency Debate

10:15 p.m.

Conservative

Leon Benoit Conservative Vegreville—Wainwright, AB

Mr. Speaker, I do appreciate the member's questions and comments, but I do want to correct him on one thing. I did not say the government had done all it can do. I said we have done or are doing all we can do. I believe that is the case.

A lot of the loan money that we are delivering as fast as we can to cattlemen and hog producers is not yet delivered. Should it have been, and could it have been delivered in December? Absolutely. But we simply could not do it. The mechanism was not in place before. We are now putting it in place and that slows the progress down. We have to get agreements with the provinces and we have them with many of the provinces. Many of the provinces have their own programs in fact, including about five of them. That helps.

I want to be clear. Have we done all we can do? No. But have we done, and what we are still doing in terms of delivering loan money, doing all we can do? I would say, yes. Except I would acknowledge that we have a lot to do in some areas.

In the area of developing markets, and this is to deal with a long term problem. It is not going to deal with a problem here--

Livestock IndustryEmergency Debate

10:15 p.m.

Conservative

The Acting Speaker Conservative Andrew Scheer

Order. I have to cut off the hon. member to accommodate another question. The hon. member for Beauharnois—Salaberry.