Debates of May 14th, 2009

Agriculture and Agri-food--Main Estimates, 2009-10

[Ralph Goodale, Liberal, Wascana, SK]

Madam Chair, typically with the government, and I have noticed this over the last three years, when it begins an answer with “nothing could be further from the truth”, it is exactly the truth.

I would advise the minister that the PFRA has been international and functioning internationally for years. It has been a lead agency for CIDA in implementing foreign aid projects, especially in Africa. It was also the agency called in by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers back when the Mississippi had the great flood back in the 1990s. So PFRA has been international for a long time.

As the attrition of PFRA continues, decision-making authority has essentially been removed from the headquarters operation in Regina and centralized in Ottawa. When PFRA people in Regina retire, their positions go vacant and they are not replaced. Attrition is indeed well underway. This is clearly the plan, to let it wither on the vine.

Will the minister specifically reverse this and run the department's environmental programs from Regina? Why not? There is no impediment to that. Why does the PFRA centre of excellence and expertise have to be the victim here?

[Gerry Ritz, Conservative, Battlefords—Lloydminster, SK]

Madam Chair, the member for Wascana should spend more time in Regina rather than spending his weekends in Florida because he should know that there is a new director general in Regina.

The ADM from Ottawa does travel back and forth to ensure that that chain of command is intact, but there is a new director general in Regina. I would be happy to set up a meeting for the member for Wascana if he would care to meet with him tomorrow when he gets home. We have a week out and I am certain I could make up a meeting for him during that time.

[Ralph Goodale, Liberal, Wascana, SK]

Madam Chair, I am happy to advise the minister that I do not and never have taken a holiday in Florida.

With all the minister's happy assurances tonight, will he assure the House that the full existing staff complement of the former PFRA will be maintained in Regina? Will all the regional and district offices of the former PFRA be maintained? Will all former PFRA community pastures remain intact, or are those federal pastures among the capital assets that the finance department is now proposing to sell?

[Gerry Ritz, Conservative, Battlefords—Lloydminster, SK]

Madam Chair, nothing along those lines of discussions have taken place to date and I do not foresee any in the future.

[Ralph Goodale, Liberal, Wascana, SK]

Madam Chair, I have one other issue unrelated to PFRA.

With regard to the crisis in the pork industry, is the government planning a $30 per head emergency payment to help Canadian pork producers, as they have requested?

[Gerry Ritz, Conservative, Battlefords—Lloydminster, SK]

Madam Chair, the member opposite should know, as WTO negotiations began under his party's mandate, which stagnated, that anything we do must fall within the purview and not be challenged. It would be senseless to close a border by initiating a payment. Certainly those discussion go on. We are working with the pork industry as to how we can do that through existing programming.

[Denis Coderre, Liberal, Bourassa, QC]

Madam Chair, I hope the minister will give some serious answers.

What I would like to know, first of all, is whether he agrees with supply management, or not.

[Gerry Ritz, Conservative, Battlefords—Lloydminster, SK]

Madam Chair, absolutely.

[Denis Coderre, Liberal, Bourassa, QC]

Madam Chair, is the minister doing everything possible to protect supply management?

[Gerry Ritz, Conservative, Battlefords—Lloydminster, SK]

Madam Chair, and beyond. The industry is thrilled with the work we have undertaken. The last government talked the talk but did not walk the walk.

As I said in an earlier answer, we initiated article 28. We have initiated cheese compositional standards. We have put in place the special safeguard. We were the only country not to have that in play. I do not know why the previous government did not get it done. I guess if it had had a fifth mandate it probably would have come around to it.

[Denis Coderre, Liberal, Bourassa, QC]

Madam Chair, we have been served up some fine words, and the usual tape.

I think we have just found out that the minister does not really know his files very well. I have here the Canada-European Union Joint Report: Towards a Comprehensive Economic Agreement. This is the first time in connection with free trade and negotiation that supply management has been called into question. Whenever there is a report of this type there is no mention of supply management.

Why does the minister not tell us, with one of his uninspiring answers, what he has done to keep supply management out of this report?

[Gerry Ritz, Conservative, Battlefords—Lloydminster, SK]

Madam Chair, the member opposite is seeing black helicopters. I know he does that a lot in question period too.

There is nothing subversive here. Supply management is alive and well under this government and will continue to be, regardless of any free trade talks that go on. The member opposite knows these talks will take some three to five years. We are in the preliminary stages. Supply management, for all intents and purposes, for this government is off the table. We say that all the time.

The lead negotiator is Steve Verheul, a man very well respected and trusted by supply management to have the industry's best interest in play. I do not know how else we can assure the member. When supply management is concerned—

[Denis Coderre, Liberal, Bourassa, QC]

Madam Chair, we have seen how the sense of humour of this minister affected the families of the people who died of listeriosis. He ought to adopt a more serious approach.

I will leave him a bit of time, because the families of the listeriosis victims who are watching us now are waiting for an apology from this minister. He ought to take the time to make one.

In chapter three of the report — Discussions on a possible deepened economic agreement, the following is written under point 3.1:

The Scoping Group recognized that any agreement should address the issues of agriculture export subsidies and state trading enterprises and assess any possible distortion of competition and barriers to trade and investment these issues could create.

Has Europe already won as far as supply management is concerned?

[Gerry Ritz, Conservative, Battlefords—Lloydminster, SK]

Absolutely not, Madam Chair. The European Union is notorious for some of its subsidies, which are as high as 600% to 700% on certain commodities.

We are having good, fulsome discussions, no different than we had around the table at the WTO. Supply management was never at risk and never will be under this government.

[Denis Coderre, Liberal, Bourassa, QC]

Madam Chair, he can use his canned answers and his talking points, but the fact is that people are watching us. This is the first time we have seen something like chapter 3 in a negotiation report.

We just did the framework for the negotiation and supply management is in it. It is the first time ever that we have had that kind of agreement, that kind of framework.

I want to know why the minister was sleeping at the switch instead of protecting our producers.

[Gerry Ritz, Conservative, Battlefords—Lloydminster, SK]

Madam Chair, I can assure the member opposite that there is no framework. What we are beginning discussions on is a scoping exercise. This is where all free trade agreements begin. As we move forward, we set aside certain things and we work through other things. We will continue to do that but we do have a very positive track record. I am proud to support supply management. Nothing is going to change on our watch. We will continue to stand firm with our supply managed sectors.

[Denis Coderre, Liberal, Bourassa, QC]

Madam Chair, the group responsible for defining the scope of any future deepened economic agreement met three times. The group's discussions and findings defined the scope. Will the minister stand up and apologize to the families of the people who died of listeriosis?

[Gerry Ritz, Conservative, Battlefords—Lloydminster, SK]

Madam Chair, I have done that a number of times. We look forward to the complete independent investigation report. We have had a number of other reports from all of the departments involved.

I have made my apologies a number of times and I am happy to do that again. We are working through this situation to build a stronger food safety system in this country, after the cuts that were done under the Liberal government.

[Carolyn Bennett, Liberal, St. Paul's, ON]

Madam Chair, last summer, a number of people died of listeriosis. I cannot believe, looking at your estimates, Mr. Minister, that you have reduced the funding to the Canadian Food Inspection Agency from $236,000 to $220,000. To actually reduce--

[The Deputy Chair, NDP, Denise Savoie]

The hon. member should address her remarks to the Chair.

[Carolyn Bennett, Liberal, St. Paul's, ON]

Yes, Madam Chair. I would also ask the minister to explain how the contributions to support those initiatives that contribute to the improvement, advancement and promotion of the federal inspection system can be reduced by 60%. That is down from $335,000 to $136,000 on page 213 of the main estimates. Could he explain himself?

[Gerry Ritz, Conservative, Battlefords—Lloydminster, SK]

Madam Chair, I am not sure what the member opposite is talking about. There have been no cuts to CFIA. If anything, we have increased the budget. We have increased the personnel. We have 14% more front line inspectors working than were there when we took over as government.

We continue to fully fund CFIA. There are times when we need to move funding around but at the end it is to build a better food safety system and give CFIA the funds and the personnel it needs to do the job. We will continue to do that.

[Carolyn Bennett, Liberal, St. Paul's, ON]

Madam Chair, I would ask any Canadian watching to go to page 2 of the Canadian Food Inspection Agency and look at the numbers on the page that the minister is denying.

The Canadian Food Inspection Agency said that there would be developed research projects to address the gaps, that it would expand the scientific knowledge and that the focus would be on biofilms, disinfectant virulence factors and effective detention methodologies. How will the minister pay for that? Has the agency embarked on the very important table top exercises and training to ensure that the next time there is a much better performance?

[Gerry Ritz, Conservative, Battlefords—Lloydminster, SK]

The short answer, Madam Chair, is yes. In the introspective that the CFIA did, along with the public health offices of both provincial and federal governments in their introspections, they have all identified situations that can be improved and we will continue to work on that.

We intend to fully fund the CFIA. We are anxious to get the report from the independent investigation, coupled with the four other reports that have been done. We will look at what funding shortfalls there are and address those in a supplementary budgetary process.

We do not want to just throw money at situations for money's sake. We want to ensure that it is directed to where it should be, that personnel is hired and that it builds the process that is required.

[Carolyn Bennett, Liberal, St. Paul's, ON]

Madam Chair, in the testimony of the B.C. CDC and in the report of the Ontario public health agency there were very serious criticisms in the communication.

We know from B.C. CDC that it thinks that CFIA works perfectly well as long as there is no trouble. However, as soon as an outbreak occurs, it said that there is a serious problem with the agency sharing information. The Ontario public health officer was very clear about the confusion that existed in terms of the communication among agencies with people not sharing information.