Wayne Easter

[Business of Supply, May 16th, 2006]

Mr. Speaker, I listened to the member's remarks and I think he should look at the pesticide issue in Ottawa. Ottawa tried to impose a bylaw. The mayor had to call a rural-urban summit last fall. The farmers were outraged because they cannot have the same laws applied to them in terms of what they are doing in their fields to control weeds with herbicides, pesticides and fungicides in order to grow a high quality crop.

My concern with this motion is that the federal government, through the exercise of the motion, would basically provide blanket treatment across the country, and I think it would cause untold difficulties for the farm sector. The motion mentions that it does not apply to farms, but there will be instances where it does. I see this as a great problem.

How is the member going to ensure that this does not shut down our production base, that it does not make it difficult for us to produce in a way such that we would not have disease and moulds in some of our crops?

[Grain Transportation, May 11th, 2006]

Mr. Speaker, the problem is the farmers are not keeping the cars; the railways are keeping the cars. As a result, the farmers will lose a deal, which would mean $30 million. The minister substitutes with an agreement of a pittance of $2 a tonne savings. Worse, the new minister has broken his trust with the farm communities and, by his actions, admits the railways are overcharging.

When will the government stand up for the farm communities? First, the Minister of Finance provides them with less money. Next, the Minister of Agriculture says that there is no cash for spring. Now the Minister of Transport sells farmers--

[Agriculture, May 3rd, 2006]

Mr. Speaker, the minister knows that the government's budgetary commitments do not come up to what this government had committed last year.

Let me quote from the Library of Parliament document dated today:

Even if the $1.5B additional funding announced yesterday was added, the total cost does not reach the amount mentioned by the Minister.

It is one thing for the minister to have his numbers wrong, but it is another for the minister not to put cash out to farmers. They need it now.

Will he tell us now that there will--

[Agriculture, May 3rd, 2006]

Mr. Speaker, yesterday, the budget was deceptive on assistance for farmers. In reality, the budget has less money for farmers than the previous government's commitment. This budget has no cash for farmers for spring planting. The income crisis is now and the minister knows it.

Will the minister restructure this money so that it gets into the hands of farmers for spring planting? They need the money now.

[Agriculture, May 2nd, 2006]

Mr. Speaker, there is no scientific rigmarole here. This is pure protectionism on the part of the United States administration. The minister has a responsibility to act. How can the government be so callous when it comes to dealing with Canadian producers? What action is this minister or the Minister of International Trade going to take in the interests of Canadian farmers?

[Agriculture, May 2nd, 2006]

Mr. Speaker, Canadian live cattle over 30 months were expected to move into the United States in June. However, with the Prime Minister's soft approach to the United States, the U.S. Secretary of Agriculture has now made it clear that cattle over 30 months will not be permitted until some time in 2007, a year from now.

If the United States will not keep its word on cattle imports, what hope is there for the softwood lumber deal? Why has the government accepted this treatment from the United States administration? Will the Prime Minister not stand up for Canadian cattle farmers and fight in their interests?

[Federal Accountability Act, April 27th, 2006]

Mr. Speaker, I want to say to the parliamentary secretary opposite that there is no strategy by the Liberals to block the bill. We want to get it to committee fast. I know he wants--

[Agriculture, April 24th, 2006]

Mr. Speaker, let us talk about gall. The Parliamentary Secretary to the Prime Minister knows that the Conservative government has not contributed 13¢ to the farm community, not 13¢. The only money the Conservatives have put out is what the previous finance minister booked. This situation is urgent.

I might mention as well that the parliamentary secretary who just spoke wants to undermine the Canadian Wheat Board and take another $200 million out of farmers' pockets.

When will the government act with actual funds and will it act today?

[Agriculture, April 24th, 2006]

Mr. Speaker, farmers continue to demonstrate for monetary action from the government to address the farm income crisis. Provincial ministers are calling for assistance and they are calling for it now.

Today, 21 farm leaders in an open letter and press conference addressed to the Prime Minister stated that action was needed immediately. The Prime Minister expressed his concern earlier but flip-flopped on producing immediate dollars.

Will the Prime Minister recognize the urgency of the situation, the cash shortfall, and commit funding immediately to deal with the farm crisis?

[Resumption of debate on Address in Reply, April 11th, 2006]

Mr. Speaker, I thank the parliamentary secretary for the common sense approach that he took to issues of the past, and I congratulate him on that.

He is the member of Parliament for Regina—Lumsden—Lake Centre, which is in southern Saskatchewan and has farming country in the area. This morning the Saskatchewan minister of agriculture was in town calling for an immediate cash infusion of $575 million in emergency funding for producers to get their crops in the ground.

The member and the Prime Minister know that he took over a government with unprecedented surpluses, the best in the G-7. They know that money is available to deal with the farm crisis there. In fact, on March 31 last year the previous minister of finance, also from Regina, put in place $1 billion to deal with the cash shortfall, and that was for the country. The best opportunity to acquire money for these kinds of needs is prior to March 31, and the government missed that opportunity.

We, as a party, are calling for an immediate cash infusion of more than $1.6 billion. Could the member opposite give us some assurance that there will be immediate cash going out there to deal with the farm crunch? It is mentioned in the throne speech.