André Bellavance

[Agriculture, October 31st, 2006]

Mr. Speaker, this morning the Union des producteurs agricoles sent out a distress call denouncing the situation of potato farmers and horticultural producers in Saint-Amable who have suffered enormous losses since their region was placed in quarantine following the discovery of the golden nematode.

What specific assistance measures does the Minister of Agriculture intend to adopt to help these producers?

[Agriculture and Agri-Food, October 27th, 2006]

Unfortunately, Mr. Speaker, there will continue to be many demonstrations.

Quebec received on average only 6.8% of the total paid out by Agriculture Canada under its three main income support programs in 2006. The Fédération des producteurs de cultures commerciales du Québec has met with the Minister of Agriculture and Agri-Food and Minister for the Canadian Wheat Board and yesterday, at the Standing Committee on Agriculture and Agri-Food, his representatives told us that the minister had nothing new to offer.

Has the government abandoned grain producers? If not, when will it do something?

[Agriculture and Agri-Food, October 27th, 2006]

Mr. Speaker, the Quebec grain sector remains mired in one of the worst income crises ever. For several years now, farm bill subsidies to American producers have depressed grain prices on the North American market. Current income support programs are not working, are needlessly expensive, and the government does not have a long-term vision.

Quebec and Ontario grain producers are at the interprovincial border at this very moment, protesting the federal government's inertia. When will we have a true income support program that is flexible and meets their needs?

[Agri-Traçabilité Québec, October 20th, 2006]

Mr. Speaker, I would like to congratulate the team at Agri-Traçabilité Québec, which recently celebrated its fifth anniversary.

Created in September 2001, ATQ is an independent, non-profit organization that grew from a partnership between farmers and the Quebec government, whose purpose is to develop, implement and operate a permanent identification and tracing system for Quebec agricultural products.

Since June 2002 in the dairy and beef cattle sectors, and since December 2004 in the sheep sector, the organization has been tracing animals from the farm to the abattoir.

Furthermore, ATQ is working on various tracing projects in the deer sector, the transport of live animals, and the poultry and egg sector.

The Bloc Québécois commends the leadership of Martine Mercier, Agri-Traçabilité Québec's first president, and that of Linda Marchand, the managing director. The Bloc would also like to wish continued success to Richard Maheu, Agri-Traçabilité Québec's current president, for many years to come.

[Committees of the House, October 18th, 2006]

Despite everything, I have managed to understand the member's question. I agree with her that this decision is antidemocratic, because we saw the Canadian Wheat Board stifled when the Russians invaded Afghanistan, as I mentioned earlier in my speech. At that time, there was a reason, but today there is none.

The minister, in his passionate speech—which was not supposed to be a speech—never explained why the government was using such a harsh method against the Canadian Wheat Board.

Yet section 47.1 of the Canadian Wheat Board Act gives farmers the right to choose what they want. Nothing but a referendum would give them the opportunity to decide on the future of the Canadian Wheat Board.

[Committees of the House, October 18th, 2006]

Mr. Speaker, I thank the member for her question, although it is a bit hard to hear because the atmosphere is rather charged. In my opinion, the Conservatives have so few arguments to support this decision to put the Canadian Wheat Board out of commission that they are talking nonsense and hurling insults. I find it very rude of the members. I can take it, though, it is no problem for me.

[Committees of the House, October 18th, 2006]

Mr. Speaker, when I was speaking earlier, the Conservatives were not listening.

I presented the opinion of the Union des producteurs agricoles du Québec on this. I was criticized for making a connection between plans for the Canadian Wheat Board and plans for supply management. I did not make up this connection. This comes from supply managed producers in Quebec who immediately see the Conservatives' ideology on free trade. To them this ideology falls precisely in line with what the U.S. and the European Union are asking for. The latter claim our collective marketing systems are suspect and rely on government subsidies. This makes me laugh because the Americans and the Europeans subsidize extensively. We are simply agreeing with them. We are saying that perhaps our systems are upsetting to others and we should abolish them. Quebec does not share this ideology.

I imagine that the member who just rose also knows supply managed producers elsewhere in Canada who are not at all happy with what the Conservative government is doing to the Canadian Wheat Board. What comes next is cause for concern. It is not good for producers not to have the right to choose what they want for their own organization. We should let them vote, be democratic and adopt the motion of the member for Malpeque. It is the only way to have the real answer. The Conservatives will not give us the real answer.

[Committees of the House, October 18th, 2006]

That is what I thought. The minister just said yes. He is going to sign at all costs, for all of Canada, a WTO agreement, even though this would jeopardize the Canadian Wheat Board and especially the supply management system. Is that what the minister wants?

I would like to see him stand up for our farmers a bit more. Recently, we made requests on behalf of potato farmers. Farmers in Saint-Amable are still having problems with golden nematode. We would like to see a program specifically for farmers affected by golden nematode. Once the embargo was lifted and the problem with the Americans was resolved, these farmers had to destroy their potato crops. Growers in the Saint-Amable region are also affected by this problem. Yet, the CAIS program cannot help them.

I would like the minister to rise—and be just as passionate and firm as he was earlier when he tried to corner me—and defend these farmers, and not only by pointlessly attacking—

[Committees of the House, October 18th, 2006]

Mr. Speaker, I can finally respond.

That was a rather passionate speech. I would like to see the hon. member equally passionate, fiery and firm when the time comes to defend the supply management system.

Earlier, I used the example of our considerable concern in committee, when he said that Canada would not decline on a future WTO agreement, rather it would sign on. I asked if that would mean “at all costs.” I did not get an answer earlier, so would it be “at all costs”?

[Committees of the House, October 18th, 2006]

I understand what goes on in Quebec is not of much interest to the Conservative Party, but I think that it is very important to talk about these things.

Another major factor in the failures was the negative reaction by competitors, who used every possible means to bring those systems down. Based on experience in Quebec, we have very good reason to assume that freedom of choice when it comes to marketing grain in the Prairies will eventually lead to the elimination of the Canadian Wheat Board and will have negative consequences for producers, including lower prices.

This information comes from the Union des producteurs agricoles. I did not make it up. We did experiments and experienced failures ourselves in the 1990s relating to the same thing as what the Conservative government now wants to put in place for the Canadian Wheat Board. We should look to the example of what happened in Quebec and not repeat this kind of mistake. It is reasonable to experiment, but it is also reasonable to learn from our mistakes.

So in the UPA’s view, the Canadian Wheat Board provides producers with market income that is higher and fairer. It guarantees stable and predictable supply in the agri-food industry. The UPA is also of the view that we cannot allow the Conservative government to destroy such an influential institution, one that creates 14,700 direct and indirect jobs, with spinoffs amounting to $852 million a year.

I urge everyone in this House to vote for the motion presented by the member for Malpeque.