Ralph Goodale

[Canadian Wheat Board, March 18th, 1996]

Mr. Speaker, the hon. member will know the report to which he is referring is at least four years old. He will also know that when it was originally produced it was about an inch thick.

I have consulted with the board on this matter not only last week but over this weekend. It has assured me the recommendations brought forward by Deloitte & Touche four years ago have been pursued and implemented. If the hon. gentleman would like to put a question on the Order Paper about any specific recommendation I would be happy to respond to it.

[Dairy Industry, March 18th, 1996]

Mr. Speaker, obviously one of the issues that remains to be dealt with, an issue the dairy industry in terms of producers and processors is very anxious to deal with, is the question of future pricing.

Under the Canadian system of supply management producers will have the opportunity to deal with the price setting regime in the future in consultation with processors and the Canadian Dairy Commission. It is obvious that as the producers no longer have access to what they call the direct payment they will want to recoup a good portion of that, as much as they possibly can, from the pricing system.

Over the last 10 years or so the general inflation rate with respect to food products in Canada has been in the order of 30 per cent. By contrast, the inflation rate with respect to dairy products in Canada has been only in the neighbourhood of 16 per cent, which indicates there is some room for price adjustment.

[Dairy Industry, March 18th, 1996]

Mr. Speaker, at the time of the federal budget in 1995 we indicated certain staged reductions in the dairy subsidy that would take place during the current fiscal year and the next fiscal year.

We also indicated that we would consult with the dairy industry across Canada, particularly in provinces like Quebec and Ontario where the dairy industry is concentrated, to discuss the future of the dairy subsidy beyond the initial two years that were dealt with in the budget last year.

Those consultations took place very extensively. They involved me, my parliamentary secretary, my departmental officials, the Canadian Dairy Commission and a broad cross-section of representatives in the Canadian dairy sector.

We raised very clearly the fiscal difficulty the government was facing. We indicated the dairy subsidy would not be sustainable for the long term. We sought their advice in terms of how best to handle the dairy subsidy in those circumstances. A wide variety of options was discussed in terms of how this situation could be managed. The dairy industry very clearly indicated that while it would prefer to retain its subsidy, faced with the fiscal reality of the country to deal with this issue it would recommend the phase out approach that we have implemented.

[Trade, March 14th, 1996]

Mr. Speaker, the actions taken by the United States with respect to farm policy are always a subject of very active interest on the part of the Canadian government in discharging its responsibilities to make sure that policies internationally do not impinge on Canadian rights and interests in the arena of trade.

The United States has undertaken certain commitments to the new World Trade Organization with respect to other bilateral and regional trading agreements. The Government of Canada will be extraordinarily vigilant in ensuring that the United States and all of our other trading partners live up to the spirit and the letter of their obligations under those international agreements.

[Canadian Wheat Board, March 14th, 1996]

Mr. Speaker, the report to which the hon. gentleman is referring is, I presume, the same report to which his colleague in the Reform Party referred yesterday. That report is one which apparently was conducted in 1992.

The fact that the wheat board undertook to have that study done indicates the wheat board's own concern about issues and the importance which the wheat board places on dealing with those issues. I am advised by the Canadian Wheat Board that since the report has been completed, the board has acted on the recommendations.

[Canadian Wheat Board, March 13th, 1996]

Mr. Speaker, the kinds of concerns referred to by the hon. gentleman in his question are among the very reasons the western grain marketing panel is conducting work at present across western Canada. As we speak, the panel is conducting a series of public hearings in Winnipeg and it will go on to hold hearings in Edmonton and in Regina. The process is entirely open, entirely transparent.

If the hon. gentleman has more than just allegations and accusations, if he has specific, constructive suggestions on how to improve the marketing of western Canadian grain, I invite him to put those ideas before the western grain marketing panel so that they can be aired and reviewed in the proper forum.

[Canadian Wheat Board, March 13th, 1996]

Mr. Speaker, as the hon. gentleman knows, the Canadian Wheat Board is already subject to an annual audit, conducted by a very well known national accounting firm in Canada, according to all national and international accounting standards. On the issue of an annual audit, it is already accomplished.

In terms of the general argument about opening the books, there is a process under way right now in western Canada under the jurisdiction of the western grain marketing panel that is looking at a variety of complaints about our marketing system. A number of arguments are being made before that panel with respect to transparency and accountability. I hope we will receive some very useful advice from the panel on how to improve accountability and transparency through the operations of the Canadian Wheat Board.

I remind the hon. member the Canadian Wheat Board operates in an intensely competitive international environment. I hope he would apply the same standards to international grain companies like Cargill, Continental and others that he would presume to apply to the Canadian Wheat Board.

[Agri-Food Sector, March 4th, 1996]

Mr. Speaker, over the course of the last year or so the United States has repeatedly invited us on the Canadian side to renegotiate these tariff equivalents with respect to supply management. The Canadian government with the full support of all the provinces and the full support of Canadian supply management

agencies has consistently said no to the request from the United States.

We believe the United States is trying to obtain by the mechanism of the dispute settlement process what the United States could not obtain through the negotiating process. Canada intends to stand firm. Canada will not blink.

[Agri-Food Sector, March 4th, 1996]

Mr. Speaker, I am very pleased to say that in the face of the NAFTA challenge launched by the United States with respect to Canada's supply management system, all of the relevant farm organizations, all of the provincial governments and the Government of Canada are totally united in putting forward the most vigorous, articulate and thorough defence of this valuable made in Canada system for the supply management of our agricultural products.

We are launching that vigorous defence in the face of the American action for three very compelling reasons: first, because supply management has served this country very well; second, because we firmly believe we are right as a matter of trade policy and trade law; and third, because this government promised Canadian farmers, including Quebec farmers that we would defend our system of supply management. We will keep that promise.

[Agriculture, March 4th, 1996]

Mr. Speaker, I certainly appreciate the hon. member's important question. As he knows, for the past several months a task force has been at work consulting with all of the affected FFA

stakeholders and offering advice about how the FFA adjustment process should proceed away from subsidization.

The task force has been guided by the able leadership of my friend the Secretary of State for Agriculture and Agri-Food. The final report has been received. We will be in a position to respond in detail this afternoon. I am pleased to say that we have been able to respond favourably to the vast majority of the task force's recommendations, including the specific point mentioned by the hon. member.