Mr. Speaker, the member spoke fairly extensively about the global situation on food. I met with some Ontario farmers here a few minutes ago. The statistics they gave me are absolutely startling because, although I know the member opposite is not doing this, there is a tendency to blame the farmer, as if he or she is getting the increased prices that are causing this escalation in food costs.
I will give two examples. Both are in dispute: one at this committee and one on ethanol. For a box of cornflakes that costs $3.54 in the grocery store, the amount paid to the producer who grew the corn is actually 11ยข, which is a fairly small share. The beef rancher receives roughly $1.83 for a prime sirloin steak that costs about $14.04 in the store.
My point, and I think the member would agree with me, is that the cost of food is not as a result of the primary producer, but I would agree with him that there is some difficulty in other countries because of this.
My question for the member is this. The committee made a number of substantial recommendations in the report about trying to get money out there. In its response, the government had this to say:
The Government recognizes the need to support industry in dealing with serious pressures, but is also conscious of the need to do so in ways that do not mask market signals and are consistent with our international trade obligations.
Does the member believe that is right? We know the minister went down to talk to the secretary of agriculture in the United States before he announced his hog and beef program. Does the member think it is right that the minister seems to be taking more direction from the United States secretary of agriculture than he is from Canadian farmers?
Does the member think we should absolutely always be putting our international obligations first? This is what the minister is really saying in his response. Other countries such as the United States put their farmers--