Mr. Speaker, I have a one hour speech but you are not going to give me an hour. I prepared a lot of my speech in advance because I knew this debate was coming. I will lay aside my speech, if I do not have this hour, and I will be sharing my time.
I am not here to score cheap political points as some of the other political parties. I was to describe the farming situation. Instead this evening I will read to the House, describe to the House and give the House some of the comments farmers have made directly to me.
I will start with a letter from Bill Lozinski that I received last week. I am hoping the government will listen because the people I will tell the House about today are real people and they need to be heard. This is what Mr. Lozinski had to say:
Dear Mr. Breitkreuz,
I do not feel guilty or ashamed to be paid fairly for what I produce. The unfairness in today's agriculture situation is unbelievable.
One bushel of wheat will produce approximately 125 loaves of bread which amounts to $250 (give or take a dollar or two)—
That is if they are bought in a grocery store. He went on to say that farmers get $2.50 of that amount. Out of the $250 that it cost people to buy the bread, he says farmers get $2.50. He continued:
—and it costs us $75-$100 an acre to produce it. (fuel, fertilizer, chemical and seed). I'm not even mentioning the cost of machinery.
Let me stop here for a minute. I used his calculations. Does the House know that from one acre a farmer can produce 3,750 loaves of bread? That is how much these farmers are producing and he said that they are not getting anything for it. Yet the people of Canada are benefiting. Let me continue with his letter:
When farmers have money, the economy thrives. I once read that one dollar in a farmer's hand is multiplied 15 times because it is put into the economy in so many different ways.
We are not a burden on the taxpayers. We subsidize every person who buys groceries. The cheap food policy is killing rural Canada. When the price of food goes up in the store, farmers never see an increase in commodity prices. In fact, it's going backward. We are making a lot less.
(The price of a bushel of wheat in 1929 was $2.65 a bushel).
We can compare that to around $2.50 or $3.00 today. Things have not changed but everyone knows what has happened to costs. Let me get back to his letter. It is very interesting. It went on to state:
My brother-in-law lived in Switzerland for the last three years. Their grocery bill was about 50% of their gross income. A pound of hamburger was $15. A half a loaf of bread was $3.50. A turkey was $85. (Not even a good one, according to my sister-in-law). Their farmers receive an outstanding price for their commodities. I'm sure you have heard the stories of $12 for a bushel of wheat. Well, the truth is they make a lot more. Their farms are small and they have a lot of them. They are more numerous than most farm families here.
I cannot read all of his letter so I will go to the end of it:
A strong and diverse rural economy is in everyone's best interest. It is not a question of can we afford $50 an acre to offset the low commodity prices. We cannot afford not to.
That is the point. At $50 an acre we cannot afford not to have that. He continued:
Thank you, Mr. Breitkreuz, for your efforts. You can't even imagine how important this issue is today and will become in the future. Affordable food is the single most important thing in all our lives. Let's make sure it doesn't become the thing that kills us in the long run.
Let us listen to what he has to say. I especially address that to the people in the cities who are listening today.
I have spent a lot of time and effort finding out what farmers in my riding have to say in this regard. I have received over 1,000 replies in the last week alone on this issue. In the last few hours I have attempted to summarize what these people have to say.
Is there a farm crisis? Ninety-two per cent of the people who contacted my office, a mix of farmers and non-farmers, say that there is a crisis. About 70% of the people who have been contacting my office are farmers. Eighty-seven per cent of those who contacted my office said that it was affecting them directly.
Another question they responded to was what is causing this. Quite a large percentage said that what was hurting them was that input costs were too high. The second thing they emphasized in regard to what is really hurting them is the grain prices that are too low. Those two factors were the key factors causing this crisis.
How is this manifested? They cannot pay their bills. They are forced to get off farm jobs, which is creating a lot of stress for them. Businesses are complaining that farmers are not spending money in the communities around the farms and incomes have dropped substantially. That is what I am hearing from the people in my riding as I try to summarize all the responses in this regard.
Another thing I have been asking a lot of the people is whether NISA and crop insurance is good enough. This shocked me. Ninety per cent of the people who responded to my office said NISA and crop insurance were not enough to address this problem. I hope the government is listening, because it is not Reform or me who is saying this. This is what the farmers are telling me.
What are the solutions? Where are we to go on this? Approximately 50% of the people are saying they need some emergency help right now. A good percentage are saying they need help in transportation. Another thing they emphasize is that they need tax reductions. Almost half of them are saying they need some form of tax reduction.
I was quite surprised at the next one. There are very few who say they need to be able to borrow more money. They do not see that as an answer. There is also quite a large percentage that says user fees must be stopped because they are killing them. I guess everyone knows there is about $138 million in that.
If there is to be some emergency aid, one of the things I asked them was how they would like it to be distributed. I think this is important so I hope the government is listening. Over 50%, the vast majority, feel that it should be a per acre or livestock production specific. They feel that would be the fairest way for the government to address this issue.
NISA did not score very high. Less than 5% said that if we improve NISA it will somehow help. About 10% of the people said that we needed a guaranteed price for our grain. By and large they felt that a per acre payout of some kind or some livestock specific production was needed.
I have also gone ahead and summarized a lot of comments. Members have to realize that when one gets a 1,000 letters and responses coming into a riding on this issue it is very difficult to have everybody's opinion tabled in the House of Commons. I will quickly summarize them.
Most farmers said that NISA was useless. The ones who have money in it are wondering why they should be forced to take their money out during these tough times as they are using it for their retirement. The other farmers who are really struggling have said they have either withdrawn all their funds already or have very little money in their accounts and it will not make any difference in keeping their farm operation alive.
Farmers have said that NISA needs to be improved. Contributions could be increased from the federal government and the penalties would not be so high for those who withdraw their funds at the wrong times of the year.
Another group of comments come from business people. They are concerned about a farm aid package. Business people feel that it is tough for them as well. They say times are tough. Businesses are not getting any handouts from government, so why should farmers get these handouts when times are tough? These business people also say that if the farm economy fails so will their business. From that point subsidies are seen as not being so bad.
Most farmers see the solution to a farm aid package on a per acre in production basis. Farmers want to be sure however the money does not go to landlords but goes to the person who is renting the land and using it to produce a crop. As for the production set aside, farmers think there would have to be some type of formula developed for each livestock producer and that it would have to be tied to their cost of production.
In conclusion, some farmers are talking about the absurd prices for inputs: fertilizers, seed and chemicals. They say there needs to be some type of a cap on these costs. A tax reduction would help eliminate some of these but producers respond by saying that chemical companies will not lower their prices. They will increase their profit margin.
I have another 50 minutes in my speech. I will conclude by saying I hope the government will talk to me. I have been talking to farmers one on one. I have received over 1,000 responses. I would ask the government to please be open. I would like to work co-operatively with it in addressing the issue.
