Ralph Goodale

[Farm Credit Corporation, March 8th, 1994]

Madam Speaker, I am sure the hon. member will appreciate that it would be inappropriate for me to comment on specific FCC cases on the floor of the House of Commons.

I do want to assure her that I will insist that the Farm Credit Corporation deal with all of its clients in a fair and balanced way, taking into account the legitimate rights and interests of the farmer clients involved and also taking into account the fiscal integrity of the corporation which I am sure is important to the hon. member in the Reform Party.

[Farm Credit Corporation, March 8th, 1994]

Madam Speaker, I thank the hon. member for her question and thank her for her courtesy in providing me with advance notice of the question.

During the 1980s almost $1 billion in accumulated farm debt in the Farm Credit Corporation was effectively written off by the Government of Canada. This was followed by a policy review beginning in 1989 which resulted in a new mandate for the Farm Credit Corporation which was accepted I am told with broad support in the House of Commons at that time and brought into effect in the spring of 1993. That new mandate includes the

enhancement of rural Canada by providing specialized financial services that are related to farming.

In our election platform last fall, we proposed three new financial instruments to assist farmers: an agricultural equity development program, a vendor loan guarantee program and a long term mortgage program, including certain protections against interest rate fluctuations.

I am pleased to tell the hon. member that the Farm Credit Corporation is now making substantial progress in devising the details of these new instruments, as we had undertaken to do in the fall of last year. I hope to be in a position to make some specific announcements this spring.

[Agriculture, March 7th, 1994]

Mr. Speaker, as the hon. member pointed out in his question, there are several outstanding issues in bilateral trade in agriculture between Canada and the United States. Those have been under discussion since last November. The work on those issues is still ongoing. They have not been resolved to date, nor have they gone away.

My preference would be to have a solid framework agreement between Canada and the United States to lay to rest those outstanding issues once and for all. Such an agreement, mutually acceptable to both countries, would clearly be preferable to ongoing trade actions and reactions that could have the effect of undermining the $10 billion worth of agricultural trade between our two countries.

However, it is important to note two points. First of all, in our discussions with the United States, Canada will not trade off one commodity against another. Each must be dealt with independently on its own merits.

Second, any agreement we might contemplate with the United States must be fair and reasonable and in the Canadian national interest. A bad deal for Canada will not be acceptable to this government.

[The Late Douglas Charles Neil, February 24th, 1994]

Mr. Speaker, it was my privilege to know the late Doug Neil and to serve with him for a term in the House in the 1970s.

Doug was first elected as the member for Moose Jaw in 1972 and he served as a member of Parliament until 1984. From 1974 until 1979 it was my honour to represent the Saskatchewan constituency of Assiniboia which at that time was right next to the constituency of Moose Jaw.

Doug and I shared a common interest in issues such as agriculture, transportation and rural affairs. We had many encounters on these issues and others in the House, in the Standing Committee on Agriculture, in the Standing Committee on Transport and on many public platforms, especially in western Canada. We obviously had our policy disagreements, but I believe we also shared a mutual respect for each other and a profound commitment to the well-being of those we were elected to serve.

Prior to his career as a member of Parliament, Doug Neil distinguished himself as an RCAF navigator, a barrister and solicitor, a Moose Jaw city councillor and an active contributor to his community through such vehicles as the Moose Jaw Wild Animal Regional Park, the Royal Canadian Legion, the United Services Institute and the Moose Jaw Kinsmen and K-40 organizations.

Doug Neil was well known and well respected in Moose Jaw. He was a proud citizen of Saskatchewan and Canada. He was a successful and effective member of Parliament and a dedicated servant to his community. He will be missed.

I wish to join with the hon. member for Moose Jaw-Lake Centre to express on behalf of the Government of Canada our sincere condolences to Mr. Neil's family.

[Advance Payments For Crops Act, February 23rd, 1994]

Mr. Speaker, I thank the hon. member for the question.

I fully acknowledge the good policy ideas on agriculture which were contained in our red book during last fall's election and which enjoy a great amount of support among farmers and farm organizations in this country, including the proposals having to do with cash advances referred to in the hon. member's question.

I am indeed anxious to proceed with improvements in our agricultural cash advance system subject to only one thing, and that is I want to solicit and receive the advice and recommendations of major farm organizations in this country. I would like them to confirm to me their concurrence that the $50 million to $75 million that we might spend on cash advances in any particular fiscal year is in their judgment the highest and best possible use for those funds, bearing in mind that the overall pot of money for agricultural programs is limited and we must set our priorities.

[Product Labelling, February 18th, 1994]

Mr. Speaker, with the hon. member and all Canadians, I am very proud of the standards that we have in this country in terms of health, safety and the quality of our agricultural production.

The question of country of origin labelling is a subject that I am very interested in pursuing. I thank the hon. member for raising the issue.

The issue has implications of course for the private sector and for the provinces. It also has certain trade implications in terms of our obligations with respect to the new GATT and GATT rules. With those and some other cautions in mind, I would be very happy indeed to pursue the principle of this type of labelling in the Canadian national interest.

[Agriculture, February 16th, 1994]

Mr. Speaker, I thank the hon. member for his question.

The quotations referred to which were attributed to the Prime Minister could have been attributed to me and to other members on this side. They were made in the context of an action taken by the previous government to remove barley, at least in part, from the jurisdiction of the Canadian Wheat Board. Subsequently the action was proved to be without legal authority and the subject of a court challenge. The court eventually held that the conduct of the previous government was outside the jurisdiction of the Canadian Wheat Board Act.

It was in the context of the legal dispute that we made our remarks about a year ago now, or last summer, in respect of the desirability of a plebiscite.

Having said that, we are not philosophically opposed to a plebiscite or to the proposition that was put forward by the farm groups referred to in the hon. member's question.

I would caution the hon. member and those farm organizations that we all need to think through very carefully both the procedures and the implications of a plebiscite with respect to this particular farm marketing issue because it is not quite as simple as those who might raise this proposition would lead some to believe.

[Agriculture, February 9th, 1994]

Mr. Speaker, the problem in Canada with BSE disease in cattle in the last number of months is a very serious one. It is very troubling to livestock owners. They obviously recognize the problem of not dealing with the disease but also recognize the very traumatic consequences that flow from the kind of control measures which are necessary to deal with the disease.

It is not a happy situation but it is one officials in my department have been approaching very seriously and conscientiously. Our control measures have had the complete support of virtually every major livestock organization in the country as well as the veterinary medical associations, provincial departments of agriculture, international trade officials and our world trading partners.

It is not a happy circumstance but we have tried to deal with it in a very conscientious and, to the extent possible, compassionate way.

[Agriculture, February 9th, 1994]

Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the question. Under the previous government and in conjunction with provincial governments a process is under way to review and revamp Canadian farm income safety net programs. That process resulted in a conference last week in Winnipeg involving the federal government, the provinces, farm organizations and others aimed toward developing a consensus on farm safety net programs.

There was a great deal of support at the meeting for the concept of the whole farm program that we had described in our red book, a program that would be GATT consistent and market neutral and financially sound, affordable and effective. Unfortunately we had less agreement concerning the exact details of such a program or programs.

On the hon. member's point about the broadest possible consultation, he and others can be completely assured of that as we work toward the final development of this concept. I would also want to include in that consultation all members of the House of Commons who would be interested in this very important subject for agriculture.

[Canadian Milk Board, February 7th, 1994]

Mr. Speaker, I thank the hon. member for his question. He is right. There was an unfortunate delay in the delivery of some dairy cheques in late December and early January. That delay resulted from communication problems between the Department of Supply and Services and Canada Post.

As soon as the Canadian Dairy Commission learned of the problem it notified all of the provincial milk boards and agencies to let them know the nature of the problem. The commission has also received the assurance of Supply and Services Canada and Canada Post that every effective control measure will be put in place to ensure that this kind of problem does not recur in the future.