Wayne Easter

[Request for Emergency Debate, December 5th, 2006]

Mr. Speaker, I have given notice with respect to a request for an emergency debate on the activities of the Minister of Agriculture and Agri-Food and Minister for the Canadian Wheat Board with respect to the Canadian Wheat Board.

This is an urgent matter requiring immediate discussion based on the minister's efforts to fire the CEO of the Canadian Wheat Board without cause. The CEO is the chief salesman for the board abroad, has a sound international reputation and is responsible for the sale of $6 billion worth of grains to some 70 countries.

Briefly, the issues that have occurred, which must be addressed on an emergency basis, are the following. The minister has compromised the reputation of the Canadian Wheat Board by his action of November 29 in issuing a preliminary letter on the firing of the CEO and president of the board. This has been done without cause and sends a signal internationally that the Government of Canada no longer has confidence in the board. However, members of the board of directors have sent a letter to the government saying that they do have confidence in that chief executive officer. In fact, he was recently reappointed to the position.

This matter must be addressed in the House by the government and it must explain itself fully in the course of debate. The action of the minister, coupled with previous actions in dismissing members of the board of directors, of utilizing, in an extraordinary manner, orders in council to prevent the Canadian Wheat Board from representing itself, the unprecedented interference by the minister in the process of the Wheat Board's election of directors and the growing opposition to these undemocratic processes, require the House to pronounce itself immediately.

Mr. Speaker, as I said a moment ago, members of the board of directors of the Canadian Wheat Board sent a letter to the government expressing their support for the CEO. Our international reputation is at stake, our farmers' livelihoods are at stake and in fact the very principles of a democratic country are at stake in terms of the minister's action with regard to this issue.

[Points of Order, December 4th, 2006]

Mr. Speaker, I do not take a lot of offence at what the minister said. I know he has no vision for agriculture, so maybe eyeglasses would help him see in the House.

[Canadian Wheat Board, December 4th, 2006]

Mr. Speaker, the government continues its unprecedented, unethical and undemocratic moves against the Canadian Wheat Board.

The minister's letter, a prelude to the firing of the CEO of the board, is in essence a hostile takeover of the farmers' marketing agency by the Government of Canada. As one editorial stated, this is “an action one” would “expect...of a dictatorial or socialist regime”. I would compare it to a Stalinist purge.

Will the minister cease his intimidation tactics and rescind his disgraceful letter?

[Canadian Wheat Board, November 29th, 2006]

Mr. Speaker, yesterday during a question of privilege we forced the minister to allow discussion by the Wheat Board before the standing committee, a partial reinstatement of freedom of speech. However, the minister has failed to table his letter ordering the Wheat Board to take down from its website its analysis of the minister's discredited task force. The government continues a campaign of intimidation and suppression of information and a flood of propaganda utilizing the federal bureaucracy.

When will the minister lift his gag orders and allow freedom of expression by the board?

[Privilege, November 28th, 2006]

Mr. Speaker, the Minister of Agriculture and Agri-Food and Minister for the Canadian Wheat Board refused to guarantee freedom of Canadian Wheat Board witnesses to testify before a committee.

Intimidating witnesses, who are to appear before a parliamentary committee, is a very serious matter, especially when it is from the minister who is responsible for the act they operate under. Such intimidation prevents the committee itself from fulfilling its mandate. We want witnesses to be honest and forthright and to tell us all the information.

The minister's answer could be seen to be a clear contempt of the House, committed openly on the floor of the House of Commons within hearing of all members.

I hope the minister would clarify the matter and guarantee Canadian Wheat Board witnesses that they are free to express themselves in an open and non-intimidating fashion against any fear of prosecution.

If you find a prima facie breach of privilege, Mr. Speaker, I am prepared to make the appropriate motion.

[Canadian Wheat Board, November 28th, 2006]

Mr. Speaker, how far will the government go? It is subverting information in its attempt to destroy the Wheat Board. From gag orders, disenfranchising voters, and stacked task forces, the minister's propaganda campaign and now the minister's directive has removed from its website the board's response to the minister's discredited task force.

Will the minister table this letter in the House? Will the minister allow a full and open discussion by board members on his misdirected policies and stop violating the freedom of speech of board members?

[Canadian Wheat Board, November 28th, 2006]

Mr. Speaker, on December 5 the CEO of the Canadian Wheat Board will be appearing before the Standing Committee on Agriculture and Agri-Food. We know the government does not want the substantive facts as to the consequences of the minister's proposals made public and has imposed a gag order on the board. However, witnesses before a committee need to be able to answer in a forthright and honest way without fear of persecution.

Will the minister assure the House that he will not undertake to persecute board representatives for their presentations and responses to questions at committee?

[Canadian Wheat Board, November 21st, 2006]

Mr. Speaker, farmers do not think the minister has a clue either.

The minister's efforts to take as much as $655 million out of the pockets of farmers, away from primary grain producers is just plain wrong. When will he work for farmers rather than against them? When will he address the age cattle blockade into the United States? When will he address the concerns of tobacco farmers? When will he put money in the pockets of farmers instead of taking it out? When will he address low farm income for farmers? Just when will the minister finally begin to work for Canadian farmers?

[Canadian Wheat Board, November 21st, 2006]

Mr. Speaker, it is now being confirmed by the Conservative member for Dauphin—Swan River—Marquette that the Minister of Agriculture is not listening to farmers, but is only following the Prime Minister's orders in his attempt to destroy the Canadian Wheat Board.

Beyond his gag order, beyond his trampling on the voters' lists, beyond disenfranchising 16,000 farmers' right to vote, the minister now reportedly is using his position as minister to try to influence the outcome of producer elections against the board.

Is this another direct order from the PMO?

[Federal Accountability Act, November 21st, 2006]

Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the hon. member's question, because I sincerely believe that in the Bloc amendment, the Bloc is really doing for the government what the government would not do for itself in terms of being clear-cut and putting forward the amendment to put the Canadian Wheat Board under access to information.

The reason the government has not done so is that its own advice was that it would affect the Canadian Wheat Board negatively and the government could not find a way to be absolutely sure that commercial confidentiality was protected.

Let us keep in mind the kinds of companies that the Wheat Board is up against in terms of the marketing of grain. It is up against Archer-Daniels-Midland, Cargill, Louis Dreyfus and Bunge, the big grain companies of the world. They want to take over the Canadian grain industry and disadvantage Canadian farmers. The Canadian Wheat Board is in fact there to protect Canadian farmers.

The fact of the matter is that yes, there are going to be nuisance requests for access to information, and that will put the Canadian Wheat Board at a disadvantage.

The member's indication was about government money as well. I listened to the remarks from the Bloc Québécois yesterday. The Canadian Wheat Board uses producers' money, not government money. Yes, there are government guarantees, and there have been times in the past that the government has had to come in with that guarantee, but it is farmers' money that is at stake here, the primary producers' money.

This will be the only non-government entity in Canada that falls under access to information. The Bloc member should know as well that there are several single desk selling institutions in the province of Quebec. Should the same principles be applied to them in terms of those single desk selling institutions in Quebec? Should they be under access to information? I think not.