David Anderson

[Business of Supply, February 15th, 2007]

He does not seem to understand that yet.

I want to point out first of all that he should be apologizing to western Canadian farmers for the fact that he was the minister in charge of the government file when farmers were locked up and put in jail.

We do not have a lot of time here, but I would like to direct him to a blog and “The Truth About Marketing Choice” at marketingchoice.blogspot.com. There, the member would be able to see answers to many of his questions, including the fact that if we bring in a voluntary wheat board, the Wheat Board will be one of those options; clearly, if we have a voluntary marketing system, we do not have a single desk. By definition, we do not have that. The member knows that, he understands that, and so do western Canadian farmers.

In terms of the three questions that we brought in, it is interesting that those questions are similar to the questions the Canadian Wheat Board asks on its annual survey. Last year's annual survey showed that 54% of farmers, even on wheat, wanted choice. They either wanted the board out of marketing wheat all together or they wanted a dual market. The majority of producers of wheat and the vast majority of producers of barley have indicated over the past few years in Canadian Wheat Board surveys that they want choice. We would like them to have that opportunity.

That is the best I can say about it, but I again would direct the member to “The Truth About Marketing Choice” at marketingchoice.blogspot.com. He will be able to get a lot of information about this issue so that he can understand it a little better.

[Business of Supply, February 15th, 2007]

Mr. Speaker, the member should be embarrassed, he really should. He was the minister in charge of the Canadian Wheat Board. He knows full well for single desk and choice that if we have choice the single desk is not in place, because by definition it cannot be.

[Business of Supply, February 15th, 2007]

Mr. Speaker, it is a pleasure to be here again today.

Most Canadians have seen our Conservative Party ads that are on across Canada. They talk about the fact the new choice for Liberal leader is in fact not a leader at all, and I think the chaotic nature of this motion will probably demonstrate that to Canadians. The motion is all over the place. It includes about half a dozen different things and I think demonstrates again how hard it is for the leader to set priorities. He does not seem to be able to do that.

Even on the issue I am going to talk about today, I think he has demonstrated that he cannot focus on what he said he would do. He promised before the new year that the Liberals were going to be asking a question on the Canadian Wheat Board every day. I think we have had about two of them since we have come back. Obviously someone decided they were going to tack the Canadian Wheat Board onto the end of this motion, but we in the Conservative Party have a far greater commitment to agriculture than that. I want to talk about that this morning.

I want to talk about grain marketing. On this side of the House, we believe that western Canadian grain farmers should have the freedom to choose how they market their grain, with the Canadian Wheat Board as one of the options in the marketing of that grain.

The Minister of Agriculture and Agri-Food last fall announced that we would hold a plebiscite on the marketing of barley. That plebiscite is now under way and, let me ask members, how much more democratic could the process be than what we have put in place? Not only are we consulting those who are most affected by not having marketing choice, but we are giving them clear options to choose from.

I want to talk about the options that western Canadian farmers are being presented with in the plebiscite that we are setting forth now. The minister made a commitment that the plebiscite would be based on a very clear question. He listened to people's suggestions on what that question should be. Many producer organizations, members of Parliament from both sides of the House, provincial and local leaders and individual farmers were able to offer their views on what should be the content of the plebiscite questions.

After consideration, the government decided that producers would be asked to select one of the following three options. The first option on the ballot will be: “The Canadian Wheat Board should retain the single desk for the marketing of barley into domestic human consumption and export markets”. It is fairly straightforward. The second will be: “I would like the option to market my barley to the Canadian Wheat Board or any other domestic or foreign buyer”. That is straightforward as well. The third will be: “The Canadian Wheat Board should not have a role in the marketing of barley”. They are three very clear questions.

There are people who say that western Canadian farmers are not capable of understanding those three questions. Of course, we are not the people who say that. We believe that our farmers are intelligent people and good business people. They can look at those three questions and know clearly what they are saying and what they are about.

The three options are clear. They are simple and to the point. Farmers are more than capable of expressing their preference for the option of their choice. For the farmers who want to maintain the monopoly, the question is there. For those who want to see the Canadian Wheat Board out of the picture, the question is there. For those who want the option to use the board when they want to market directly nationally or internationally, that option is there as well.

I want to talk about voter eligibility, because it is something people need to understand. The minister has said repeatedly that the plebiscite would be based on a broad base of voters. Each farm operation, whether a single producer, partnership or corporation, will be eligible for one vote as long as it has produced grain during the last year and has produced barley in at least one of the last five years between 2002 and 2006 inclusive.

This attempt was to make sure that we are dealing with actual farmers, with people who are currently farming and who have grown barley in the last five years. If producers sold barley to a feedlot, produced it for use on their own farm, or sold it to the Wheat Board, they are eligible to vote. Active farmers who intended to produce in 2006 but were unable to do so, for some reason beyond their control, will still have the opportunity to obtain a ballot by contacting the election coordinator at the website: [email protected]. They have until March 2 to arrange to get that package.

Those packages were mailed out February 7. The voting will continue until March 14. We are actively and positively encouraging barley producers to participate in the plebiscite to make sure their voices are heard.

Let me be clear about the government's intentions with the Canadian Wheat Board, because there have been some misconceptions about it. We believe it should be there as a marketing option for producers. We believe it should remain in place and continue to market on behalf of those who want to sell their grain through the board.

Our commitment to the barley and wheat producers of western Canada has been to give them the opportunity to seek out the best possible return for their product, and to give growers the chance to succeed and the freedom to make their own choices on how to produce and market their crops, whether that is through the Wheat Board or some other mechanism.

To get there, we need to meet the producers' needs, maximize their returns, maximize their choices and give them the options they deserve. That is what the barley plebiscite is all about.

This is quite a contrast to what we have seen in the past in the way that the Liberals dealt with western Canadian farmers when they wanted some changes to the system. I would like to take a few minutes this morning to tell members what happened when farmers in western Canada attempted to get some choice.

The member for Wascana has been involved in this issue for a long time. He was actually a minister at the time when five departments and agencies coordinated in an attempt to squelch and just basically squash the position of western Canadian farmers. Farmers were being faced with the possibility of having to deal with multiple government agencies at once. There were RCMP raids in the middle of the night on farmers' homes. I know of one story of a couple who had come home from the hospital when the RCMP raided their home in the middle of the night trying to confiscate their equipment. It was a terrible time for western Canadian farmers. Agencies such as the RCMP, customs, justice, Revenue Canada, and the Canadian Wheat Board all ganged up on individual farmers.

What was interesting was that farmers had enough guts to push back, particularly on the member for Wascana. They actually went to court and the courts ruled in their favour. That same day, the member for Wascana, as the minister, changed the regulations so that farmers were again in violation of the law. Most Canadians know that this action culminated in dozens of farmers being locked up in jail because they were trying to sell their grain and take it into the U.S. market.

It was a terrible time in western Canada. The Liberal government punished these farmers almost to the point of destroying them. I had the opportunity to be in Lethbridge on the day the farmers went to jail. It was a horrible sight, something I never want to see again. Women and children were crying as their husbands and fathers were being taken away. It was clear that even the law enforcement officers who were being forced to uphold the law that day thought it was basically a sham. It was an embarrassment, and it comes back onto the shoulders of the previous Liberal government.

All farmers really want is choice. They want to be able to do their own business and to be free to make their own business choices as they grow their grain and bring it to market. They want to have the opportunity to make a good living on the farm. They believe they are capable of making the decisions that will help them do that.

It is a great time for a plebiscite. We think this is the time for farmers to step forward and say they want choice. This is the time for farmers to say that they want the ability to run their own businesses as they choose. We have made democracy the centrepiece of our approach to marketing choice for western Canadian wheat and barley growers. We think that is very important for them.

We have been clear from the beginning that we believe in giving producers a choice. That is what a democracy is all about: having a voice in the decision making process.

[February 14th, 2007]

Mr. Speaker, looking to the future, we need to acknowledge that there are many aspects of how the Canadian Wheat Board is going to be able to operate in a marketing choice environment, and those things need to be discussed. While the minister has asked the Canadian Wheat Board to develop a business plan for operating in a marketing choice environment in the future, the Canadian Wheat Board has not yet provided such a business plan to him.

The task force report that was done on the implementation of marketing choice for wheat and barley provided one model of how a reformed Canadian Wheat Board might operate. I would suggest that members dig out that report and take a look at it, because it is a very good report. It lays out very clearly one of the possible options or ways in which the Canadian Wheat Board could operate in a voluntary system.

There is a variety of ways to move forward. There will no doubt be further discussion of this issue once the results of the barley plebiscite are available.

[February 14th, 2007]

As my colleague points out, that is $100 an acre for many farmers.

It is necessary that we have choice, and western Canadian farmers are expressing their opinion that they want it. The obsession by the member opposite--

[February 14th, 2007]

Mr. Speaker, it is unfortunate that the member's obsession with this issue is beginning to damage his own credibility. It is unfortunate to hear him having to resort to personal attacks. I guess we are used to it now, but it is kind of a sorry spectacle to see.

Actually he just started talking about the Algeria issue, and I would like to talk about that a bit because it is an important thing. I am glad he brought it up because I want to move into that. What he is referring to is the fact that the main grain buyer for the Algerian grain buying agency talked about the special deal that it gets from Canada.

I am going to quote from the original article tonight in order to point out that what I said in answer to his question should be of great concern to western Canadian farmers. Mr. Mohamed Kacem, the main grain buyer for the Algerian government, stated in this article that Algeria gains in a lot of ways from this longstanding trust-based relationship. It is the Government of Canada that provides Algeria with “guarantees...since it carries out” the product controls, he said, highlighting the fact that the selling price to Algeria is “carefully studied” because it is a “preferential” price for Algeria.

I am sure western Canadian farmers would like to know what that really means. The article explains that this special price saves Algeria “tens of dollars” on every tonne purchased. As far as controls are concerned, Algeria saves “over one dollar per tonne processed” as well.

We are told that on average Canada sells Algeria about 400,000 to 500,000 tonnes of wheat per year. That is around 18 million bushels. If the article is accurate in what it is saying about “tens of dollars per tonne”, and if it is at around three and half, tens of dollars per tonne would work out to about a dollar per bushel. If it is 18 million bushels, we are looking at $18 million that western Canadian farmers have lost, just on these sales to Algeria.

I think there needs to be some investigation of this issue because clearly, as he says, Algeria is getting a special deal from Canada, and western Canadian farmers do not know what that special deal is.

It is interesting as well that western Canadian farmers are clearly indicating to us that they want choice. This Algerian example is one reason why they would be demonstrating that they want choice.

There are also a couple of other illustrations that we could use to demonstrate why this issue is important to western Canadian farmers. Right now malt barley is actually at a discount to feed barley in western Canada. Feed barley, of course, goes into the livestock industry, but farmers grow malt barley because it is a premium product. Farmers virtually always get a premium to feed barley, but unfortunately malt barley is sold by the board while feed barley can be sold by the board or on the open market. Feed barley right now is actually at a premium to malt barley.

Malt barley is being sold by the board right now. The final estimated price for the producers means that they are going to get about a dollar a bushel less than producers in the United States are getting for the same grain. People wonder why western Canadian producers want choice. That is one of the reasons. They can look at the price now. One of the grain companies is posting a daily international price. The Winnipeg Commodity Exchange is posting a daily international price. Farmers can go to those websites and take a look at what they could be getting if they were able to sell their own grain.

Right now the indication is that they would be able to get a dollar a bushel more for their barley than what the Wheat Board is estimating that it will be able to pay for the rest of this year.

[Young Leaders in Rural Canada Awards, February 12th, 2007]

Mr. Speaker, today the third annual Young Leaders in Rural Canada Awards ceremony will recognize four of Canada's finest young people. It is recognition of the tremendous role that they have played in their own rural communities.

Growing up in rural Canada today is a unique experience. In rural areas there is still a place for young people to step forward and to lead. The leaders we acknowledge today have worked with family, friends and neighbours to better their towns and villages. These four young rural Canadians see opportunities where others see challenges.

Canada's new government wants to celebrate the successes of these rural youth who have dedicated their passion, spirit and skills to strengthening rural, remote and northern communities. That is why I am pleased to mention the award recipients, who are: Diane Carey of Tracadie-Shiela, New Brunswick; Noba Anderson of Mansons Landing, British Columbia; Luella Chiasson, who grew up in Belle Cote, Nova Scotia but now lives in Sydney; and Heather Muir of Walkerton, Ontario, who will be receiving an honourable mention.

Canada's new government is very proud of these young individuals and wishes them all the best for their futures.

[Canadian Wheat Board, February 9th, 2007]

Mr. Speaker, that is a reasonable question. We will be continuing to fund research in grains in western Canada. However, I am interested in why the NDP is not asking issues that are directly of concern to farmers.

We have price signals in western Canada that show western Canadian farmers are receiving 85¢ to $1 a bushel less on their barley under the present system than they would on the open market. Yet the NDP continues to ask questions unrelated to that.

Why does he not ask questions that are directly related to the income of farmers and to change the system that farmers need changed so desperately.

[Canadian Wheat Board, February 9th, 2007]

Mr. Speaker, this week, the ballots for the western Canadian barley plebiscite are being mailed out, with three clear choices. These are similar to questions that the Canadian Wheat Board uses in its own polling.

The questions are straightforward: “Do you want the system to continue as is? Do you want the option of selling to the board and any other buyer? Or, do you want the board to get out of marketing barley entirely?”

Over the next few weeks we will hear people using intimidation and fear to try to maintain the system as is. The reality is that there is good reason to support change. Western Canada desperately needs the same options and opportunities available to other farmers throughout this country.

The Winnipeg Commodity Exchange website now posts daily barley prices that let farmers see what they should be getting for their product. Farmers have compared U.S. prices to our projected returns.

With the daily price in the United States running at 85¢ to $1 a bushel above the Wheat Board's projected payments, it is clear that there is no premium in the present system. If farmers want to ensure profitability in the future, they must vote for change.

[Questions Passed as Orders for Returns, February 5th, 2007]

Mr. Speaker, I ask that all remaining questions be allowed to stand.