Agriculture committee  Thank you. That's a good question, Mr. Perron. In my view, a carbon tax of $50 per tonne is still familiar territory. Case studies were conducted before the determination of this amount. However, tripling the amount in Canada takes us into unknown territory. It's quite a signifi

Agriculture committee  In my opinion, yes. As I explained at the start of the meeting, I find that the producers' work isn't properly appreciated. Many changes have affected production. However, I think that we should look at the bigger picture. Instead of thinking about penalties, maybe we should also

Agriculture committee  I'm not sure I understand your question. I'm sorry.

Agriculture committee  I tend to agree with my fellow witnesses, Mr. Green and Ms. Turcotte, on incentivizing the sector to move, to do something. I agree. However, this back-and-forth exchanging of funds is actually quite.... This bureaucracy will only impact the efficiency of the sector. I think we

Agriculture committee  I absolutely agree with you, Mr. MacGregor, about targeting. I don't think that propane is the right target. There are other things we can look at in farming that would probably be more beneficial for the environment. The budget last week was satisfactory, I guess, and a good st

Agriculture committee  It's nowhere near enough, though.

Agriculture committee  That's a good question, Mr. Epp. As I mentioned in my opening remarks, at $50, there is no reason to be concerned about food affordability in the country. We do have a couple of cases with Quebec and B.C., and we haven't seen, really, any differences in terms of pricing patterns

Agriculture committee  Absolutely, Mr. Perron. That's what the carbon tax does. Producers are seen as polluters, but they really aren't. They need nature to make a living. However, in my opinion, we're missing the opportunity to acknowledge their contribution to the environment. There's the propane is

Agriculture committee  While I was preparing for today's meeting, I realized that we do not know enough about the effects of the carbon tax on agri-food sectors from farmgate to table. I spoke earlier about food prices. Not much research has been done and we don't necessarily understand the effects on

Agriculture committee  Thank you, Mr. Lawrence. I provided the main points I wanted to provide. The last part of my opening remarks was very much about the consumer. I've been very concerned about the affordability of food. It's been argued several times now in the media and elsewhere that the carbon

Agriculture committee  Thank you for your question, Mr. Lehoux. There aren't really any other options. Actually, there are a few, but they cost more and they are not as efficient. We have to understand that farmers don't control market rules. Many people do not understand how vulnerable farmers are a

Agriculture committee  Absolutely. I saw no problem with a $50 tax, because that amount had been recommended on the basis of case studies. By imposing a $170 tax, the government is clearly showing its commitment, which is great, but it also has to take into account the policy's effects on our farms.

Agriculture committee  Thank you very much, Mr. Chair and dear members. Climate change is a real problem and concerns us greatly. Everyone agrees that we need to act quickly. The carbon tax seems to provide a simple and fair solution, but for farmers, a $170-per-tonne carbon tax is a game-changer. By

Agriculture committee  That is the reason I mentioned the CDL. The CDL is a forum that is publicly funded, but the capital is all private. All of the investments in the companies, the discipline—they are imposed by private sector venture capitalists. Dalhousie University offers the forum and provides t

Agriculture committee  Those are very good points. I will say that I do mentor companies myself, from here in Halifax to Calgary. I work with District Ventures in Calgary, which is led by Arlene Dickinson in Montreal. I help companies. The struggle we have beyond the capital issue and beyond the talen