Lost his last election, in 2004, with 35% of the vote.
Apec Inquiry November 19th, 1998
Mr. Speaker, on October 5 the solicitor general told Canadians he would have to consider resigning if statements attributed to him by myself were corroborated. Yesterday his long term friend Fred Toole did just that.
Now that both the political friend and the political ally of the solicitor general have verified what he said about RCMP Staff Sergeant Hugh Stewart, my question for the Deputy Prime Minister is when will the Prime Minister be accepting the resignation of his solicitor general?
Agriculture November 16th, 1998
Mr. Speaker, under any scenario, funds will not flow to farmers before next March. By then the minister knows full well that it will be too late for thousands of farmers who face a genuine disaster now.
The minister hinted at some disaster relief 10 days ago at the United Grain Growers Convention in Regina but as anyone knows, you cannot go to the banker with a hint.
I ask again, when does the agriculture minister plan to announce a disaster relief fund to help desperate Canadian farmers?
Agriculture November 16th, 1998
Mr. Speaker, the minister of agriculture's response to the growing farm income crisis is to say that farmers may have to drain their net income stabilization accounts before he will introduce a disaster relief program. The Canadian Federation of Agriculture says there are many important reasons that farmers should not first have to use their NISA including the fact that by so doing a farmer might be penalized for prudent management.
When will the minister stop pretending NISA is the answer to this genuine crisis and announce a disaster relief program?
Supply November 3rd, 1998
Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the question. I think we are talking in the hundreds of millions of dollars, somewhat under $1 billion.
In terms of what would go to Saskatchewan and Manitoba, which everyone recognizes are the two provinces under the most stress at the moment, I would not be able to hazard a guess. I would assume they would take a significant portion of that money.
When the hon. member for Regina—Qu'Appelle and I met with the media a few weeks ago, we talked about somewhere between $500 million to $700 million to deal with the situation.
Supply November 3rd, 1998
Mr. Speaker, there is no question that the government could very quickly ascertain who requires relief. I notice the U.S. secretary of agriculture is saying that the $2.857 billion support program coming into effect today will go exclusively to farmers who need it.
I disagree with the minister of agriculture when he says it will end up that millions of dollars will go to big farmers who basically do not need it. The Americans know which farmers require help and which farmers qualify. I am sure the Canadian department of agriculture can devise ways to ensure it goes without any great difficulty to the folks who really need it.
Supply November 3rd, 1998
Mr. Speaker, we certainly do not have a problem with some long term tax breaks for farmers. Our concern is that we have to do something immediately because it will take some time. This is a crisis situation that demands an immediate response.
We have to support Canadian farmers as the Europeans are supporting their farmers and as the Americans are supporting U.S. farmers, or we will see such an exodus from the land that it will scarcely be believed.
There is no question we are witnessing the end of the family farm. We are moving to agribusiness and corporate farms. Perhaps a few new generation co-ops will be sprinkled in, but by and large we are seeing a real revolution in agriculture which will be hastened without help from the government.
Supply November 3rd, 1998
Mr. Speaker, I too am very pleased to take part in this important debate today on the crisis in farm income.
I was looking through notes yesterday and we first started to raise these questions in February of this year, continued on through the spring and we certainly have focused on since parliament has come back on this very important crisis in rural Canada in general, in western Canada in particular.
As colleagues have mentioned, net farm income declined by some 84% in my province of Saskatchewan in 1997 and it looks like it is going to fall by another 40% this year.
My colleague, the member for Regina—Lumsden—Lake Centre, attempted to have an emergency debate on the crisis in farm income on October 5. That was not successful. My colleague, the member for Regina—Qu'Appelle, and I held a news conference in Regina on October 16. We invited some farmers who were particularly hurting from this crisis. Lloyd Pletz who farms north of Bell Prairies was one of those individuals. He told the assembled media that day “I'm finished. I have no way to hang on”. Donnett Elder, who was also attending, has worked in the farm stress area answering phones for the past 10 years and she reports that it has never been worse out there with the phone ringing off the hook from farmers who are terribly concerned about the situation. She is looking at a $40,000 shortfall in 1998.
I mention people like Lloyd Pletz and Donnett Elder because we are attempting to put a face on a very serious and growing crisis.
I know the word crisis is a frequently overused word but it is a word that certainly applies in this instance. The Canadian Federation of Agriculture has noted that net farm income will decline by 40% overall and we are even looking at worse numbers on the prairies. It is incredible when one adds in the 84% loss in Saskatchewan and then add to that 40% to 45% this year. For farmers in Alberta it is 35% and in Manitoba it is 40%. Hog farmers virtually from coast to coast are looking at losses of $40 per animal when they get them to market.
This crisis is largely as a result of economic and trade conditions over the last couple of years. The economic meltdown in southeast Asia has been a large part of it. However, other countries have the same problems, not just Canada. Farmers in European countries and in the United States would face similar problems but their governments have taken steps to cushion the blow and reduce the impact on farmers in those communities.
In Canada we are left with the situation where so far the minister of agriculture agrees that there is a crisis but nobody is yet prepared to do anything about it. It reminds me of the old tea ad “only in Canada, you say”.
The U.S. administration is kicking in $2.857 billion under market loss payments. It begins today to help offset heavy losses resulting from historic low commodity prices, the very same problems many Canadian farmers are facing. European farmers are receiving a subsidy for wheat of up to $205 Canadian a tonne, well above the current projected world price.
We have been told by our senior international trade negotiator that in the United States the subsidy support for wheat farmers is some five times higher for American wheat than what is available to their Canadian counterpart. The bottom line is that Canadian farmers simply cannot compete.
Canadian farmers are as good as any in the world. We hope we have a goal in to double our agricultural exports by 2005 but there is no way Canadian farmers can do that without some help soon from their governments.
I asked yesterday in the House when help was going to be forthcoming to ensure that farmers were planning to plant a spring crop in 1999 rather than planning for an auction sale in the same year.
The United States is pumping up farm subsidies which are not countervails by the WTO or the GATT. Europeans are pumping up, as I noted a minute ago. Here at home help for our farmers has been slashed significantly.
In 1993 when the WTO was negotiated, Canada agreed to reduce its subsidies on agriculture by about a billion dollars over five years. In other words, we are going from $5 billion to $4 billion over the course of five years. In the usual boy scout way that Canada often operates, we have done much better than that. We have slashed some 60% of farm subsidies. We have gone from $5 billion to perhaps $2 billion and some people insist that it is probably less than $1 billion in subsidies at the moment.
We look good on the international stage but our farmers are really in dire straits. They have paid more than their fair share on the war on the deficit. It is time for a reinvestment in agriculture.
In Saskatchewan net farm income is forecast for this year to be $320 million less than it was last year. Just in passing, that is almost exactly what Saskatchewan farmers used to receive from the Crow benefit.
Another aspect of this argument is that Canada has been assisted greatly by Canadian farmers in balancing the books because of our agricultural exports. If there is not some action taken quickly I am very concerned there is a great danger we will end up killing the goose that laid the golden egg.
The minister continually relies on the net income stabilization account and crop insurance. He says that they are very good programs. For the sake of argument I will not disagree with that except to say that they are not answers to the problems we are facing now. NISA and crop insurance were not designed to look after low commodity prices or the ice storm of last year.
Another point the minister makes constant reference to is that most farmers in NISA—and we heard him say that again this morning—on average have some $18,000 in their accounts. I saw some numbers recently in terms of NISA which I would like to share with the House.
Farmers earning between $10,000 and $75,000 per year gross income on their operations account for some 62% of all farmers. The average amount in their NISA accounts is not $18,000 a year. It is not $12,000. It is not even $6,000. The average in the NISA accounts of the smaller farmer is $5,925 per year. It is scarcely worth talking about. It certainly is not a program that can be relied upon to assist farmers in the emergency they find themselves in now.
My time is just about up. We are seeing farm costs increasing sharply. There has been a 21% increase in machinery over the last five years. Fertilizer is up 57% and chemicals, 63%. I asked the minister what he was doing about cost recovery, about the $138 million more that Canadian farmers are paying for things that are not counter to GATT or the WTO.
We in this corner of the House are very concerned that the Liberals are continuing to dismantle rural Canada. The rail system, the transportation system, is in sad shape. The costs are three times higher for shipping grain to the coast.
We are asking for help for the farm sector. We feel that the minister could redeem himself and his government by announcing today that he is prepared to help out farmers with long term disaster relief.
Supply November 3rd, 1998
Mr. Speaker, as an aside, I am very appreciative, as I think all members of the House would be, to see the Minister of Agriculture and Agri-Food here for this very important debate. I know we are sometimes out of order when we try to say who is not in the House, but I think we are probably in order when we recognize that people do take the time to come and listen to the debate. I want to say very sincerely that I appreciate that.
I listened attentively to the minister and I noted that he did not make any reference to cost recovery. We have seen that rise dramatically in recent years. I think Canadian farmers are paying something in the order of $134 million per year in cost recovery. This apparently is a decision to reduce the debt and deficit situation. It is not a countervail against the WTO or GATT. I would like the minister to comment on that and see whether we could do something to bring some of those costs down.
Canadian Farmers November 2nd, 1998
Mr. Speaker, in announcing a multibillion dollar income assistance program for U.S. farmers, which starts tomorrow, the U.S. secretary of agriculture said “the package will get out some real help to farmers whose livelihoods are on the line”.
My question is to the Minister of Agriculture and Agri-Food. When will this government announce a relief program that will allow Canadian farmers whose livelihoods are equally on the line to begin planning their 1999 crop instead of their 1999 auction sale?
Agriculture October 29th, 1998
Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Minister of Agriculture and Agri-Food.
The minister will know that in 1993 Canada agreed to reduce its subsidies under the WTO by 20% over six years, but instead of doing that we gutted our farm support program by more than 60% in that period of time.
The result is that U.S. wheat farmers now receive five times more in subsidies than Canadian farmers, making it impossible for our farmers to compete.
When is the Minister of Agriculture and Agri-Food going to admit that there is an honest to goodness crisis on many farms in this country and announce a new emergency relief program?