Joe McGuire

[National Agricultural Relief Coordination Act, April 26th, 1999]

We certainly intend to spend it. If there is a disaster on any farm in Canada, through the triggers that have been negotiated people will get disaster funding.

By this Friday every province will be in receipt of some money. The money will begin to flow from the federal and provincial organizations in response to the serious situations on many of our farms across the country, especially in the province where the hon. member is from.

The government does not just wait for problems to arise. It will assist Canada's farmers. We are continually working in partnership with the provinces and industry to help producers prepare to meet the challenges of the future.

The classic example of this is whole farm safety nets. The federal government has signed agreements with all the provinces. We have a set of safety nets in place that are fully equitable, will minimize trade and economic distortions, and take provincial and regional interests into consideration.

The cornerstone of the safety net system is NISA, the net income stabilization account. This is a volunteer program that provides a source of money for farmers when their income declines for whatever reason.

NISA is a well regarded program but the government is also committed to improving on the system currently in place. The Minister of Agriculture and Agri-Food, along with the provincial ministers, are reviewing the current system and considering carefully how we will deal over the longer term with situations where exceptional circumstances seriously affect the incomes of farmers. He has said that he wants to give farmers a whole farm safety net system that provides security but does not mask the natural signals of the marketplace.

There are a number of complex issues the ministers are trying to address, including whether the funding allocated is the right one and whether the mix of programs meets the intended objectives. Ministers will continue working on the issues when they meet in Prince Albert this July.

I also add that the Government of Canada is well aware of the need to meet our international trading commitments. Our farmer assisted programs are designed and implemented with these commitments in mind. We are committed to providing support and management tools to assist our farmers within the rules of the WTO, just as we ask other nations to do.

As a medium size trading nation we are committed to a rules based trading system. Canada is also going to the upcoming WTO negotiations intending to reduce trade distorting support and protection measures around the world so that our producers can compete on a fair and level playing field.

We have been doing everything we can to make sure we hear from all parts of the agrifood industry about their interests going into negotiations before we announce an initial negotiation position for Canada this summer.

Over the past two years there have been regional meetings, hearings by the House of Commons standing committee and the Senate agriculture committee, and both the Minister of Foreign Affairs and International Trade and the Minister of Agriculture and Agri-Food have held extensive meetings with key industry groups.

Just this past week there was a major conference attended by some 600 representatives of the agriculture and agrifood sectors and the provincial and federal governments to pave the way toward a strong initial WTO position. We are now well on the way to developing a negotiating position that the provinces and all sectors of the industry can support. Our aim is to ensure Canada continues to have economically viable agriculture and food sectors.

The co-operative approach to farmer safety nets and international trade that we have been pursuing since the government took office has proven to be highly successful in the past and will stand us in good stead for the future.

Bill C-387 would not improve our ability to plan for the future, either in the development of farmer support programs or in dealing with the requirements of the WTO. For these reasons, and those outlined by my hon. colleagues, the government does not support the passage of this bill.

[National Agricultural Relief Coordination Act, April 26th, 1999]

Madam Speaker, I remind the House and the proposer of the bill that there is such a thing as short term memory and I think quite a few people are suffering from that.

We have to remember that the AIDA program was put in place principally by the leadership of the federal government responding to the crisis in the farm community and with consultations with the provinces and consultations with the safety nets committee, co-chaired by the past president of the Canadian Federation of Agriculture.

I remember the day we announced our share of $900 million to go along with the provincial $600 million for a two year $1.5 billion program. The co-chair of the national safety nets committee, then president of the Canadian Federation of Agriculture, wholeheartedly praised our efforts. He said this was done in record time, responding to the needs of the farmers from one end of Canada to the other on a farm by farm basis regardless of province.

It would be whole farm and viewed as non-controversial by the World Trade Organization. It fits with the agreements we made with the World Trade Organization. When we got our $900 million in place intensive negotiations went on with the provinces. As a result all provinces with the exception of Nova Scotia joined the program.

The money has been flowing from the provinces that have disaster programs of their own. Money has been flowing to the farmers and provinces that did not have a provincial disaster program in place. Money will be starting to flow—it has been accelerated—this Friday, which is four to six weeks earlier than predicted by everyone involved in the process.

The federal government has responded by setting aside $900 million. In the last budget it was accelerated to $600 million this year, in response to the needs of the farming community in the country.

[Agriculture, April 19th, 1999]

Mr. Speaker, in 1996 at the fed-prov meeting it was agreed there would be a conference prior to the negotiations beginning this fall for the next round of the WTO.

As the member knows, the House standing committee has held hearings across the country. People have come from across the country for take note hearings at the committee. The minister has held bilaterals for the past number of months with associations and national committees. Today a group 500 strong of processors and farmers is meeting in the congress centre to ascertain what Canada's position will be going into the negotiations. This is not a final position but it is one that will evolve over time. These producers and farmers will be in the loop.

[Agriculture, April 16th, 1999]

Mr. Speaker, if the government were interested in saving money it would not have an AIDA program at all.

The minister has offered to meet with the people in Saskatchewan to discuss their problems. To this date they have not accepted the minister's request or proposal or offer to meet with him and talk with him about their situation. They would rather go to the press, go to accountants and so on, to vent their views.

The minister stands ready to meet with the producers of Saskatchewan at any time that they are ready to do so.

[Agriculture, April 16th, 1999]

Mr. Speaker, I am unable to give those statistics.

Very few applications have come in from Manitoba and Saskatchewan to this point. In the meantime, both provinces have set up repayable loan programs which will take care of the spring cropping expenses, because it was understood that Saskatchewan and Manitoba did not have provincial disaster programs to piggyback on, like Alberta, P.E.I. and B.C. did.

It may take a little longer for those two provinces to come in with their application forms, but there is money to carry them over.

[Agriculture, April 15th, 1999]

Mr. Speaker, unlike the member, I think the farmers of Saskatchewan know the difference between an application form and a booklet.

The application form is five to twelve pages long. It can be filled out from the income tax forms or from the NISA forms. It is a very simple operation. As soon as they fill them out and send them in we will process the applications and return the money to them.

[Agriculture, April 15th, 1999]

Mr. Speaker, it is a very peculiar question from a party that does not want to pay out any money to farmers.

The minister said yesterday that 11,000 application had been sent out. As soon as they are sent in, they will be processed and the money will be sent to the farmers.

[Agriculture, April 15th, 1999]

Mr. Speaker, an example of what the government is doing as the applications come in is that Ontario, which has returned 1,000 applications, is receiving a payout of about $25,000 per farmer. The farmers on Prince Edward Island have submitted about one-fifth of their application forms at a payout rate of $38,000.

As soon as the applications come in the government will expedite the payout.

[Supply, April 13th, 1999]

Mr. Speaker, I just want to say that the Liberal Party of Canada has been in existence since the beginning of this country and will still be here for many more decades, long after that party is but a figment of somebody's imagination.

[Supply, April 13th, 1999]

Mr. Speaker, I think we will recognize that question is a very peculiar one.

The member seems to imply that we should not be spending any money in Alberta because they did not support us electorally as much as he thinks they should have. As a national government we do not do these things for the support we may garner here or there, but for what is good for the whole country as a nation from coast to coast.

If the member is suggesting we should not do anything in Alberta because we only have two or three members there, then that is a very peculiar way to think about how a national government should be running the country. We are as concerned about the problems in Alberta as we are concerned about the problems in the north or in Newfoundland or in my own province of P.E.I.

That is the way a true national government looks at things. This is why the previous speaker from the Conservative Party was saying this party represents alienation itself. They grow fat on alienation. This is why we have this topic here. They should be looking at ways where we can share and co-operate and be partners as the Fathers of Confederation envisioned it many years ago.