Without law there can be no justice
Without justice there can be no freedom
Freedom lives where justice rules

Site Last Updated -- July 2, 2008
USDA - Montana Grain Weekly Summary
Montana Wheat & Barley Committee Current Pricing
Ontario Wheat Board Pricing

Single Desk Selling: Some Relevant CWB and Operational Issues

Conformity is the jailor of freedom and the enemy of growth.   -J.F. Kennedy

Ottawa on Agriculture

2004 Days
February 05 - 06 - 18 - 20 - 23 - 25 - 26
2003 Days
October 02 - 09
September 15 - 16 - 22 - 23 - 24 - 25 - 26
June 05 - 11 - 13
May 01 - 02 - 05 - 06 - 12 - 13 - 14 - 15 - 29
April 01 - 03 - 09 - 10 - 11 - 29
March 18 - 25 - 26 - 27 - 28 - 31
February 03 - 06 - 07 - 10 - 17 - 18 - 20 - 25 - 28
January 31
2002 Days
December 12 - 13
November 01 - 06 - 07 - 18 - 21 - 22 - 25
October 21 - 23 - 24 - 25 - 31

February 27, 2004

    Mr. Gerry Ritz (Battlefords—Lloydminster, CPC): Mr. Speaker, Canadian farm families are facing unnecessary hardship. They are struggling because the Liberal government's programs actually made matters worse down on the farm.

    The minister is musing he is almost ready to make some sort of announcement. Here are a couple of things he could actually do today that would help. He could get out some real cash advances that are not mired down in bureaucratic red tape. He could do some loan guarantees to producers and of course he could remove, not delay, the cash deposit requirement for the CAIS program.

    What is stopping him?

    Hon. Bob Speller (Minister of Agriculture and Agri-Food, Lib.): Mr. Speaker, I had an opportunity to read the hon. member's release that he put out yesterday, obviously after hearing that the Government of Canada was working hard in terms of bringing forward a program to bridge Canadian farmers and farm families from today until the fall, when the CAIS program really kicks in.

    I want to tell the hon. member that I have had an opportunity to talk to Canadian farmers and farm families. The Government of Canada is working very hard with these groups to work through what is really necessary so that the Government of Canada can help them.

    Mr. Gerry Ritz (Battlefords—Lloydminster, CPC): Mr. Speaker, it is great that the minister is listening, but time is of the essence here.

    Agriculture, the primary production of food in the country, is going down for the count. Our safe, secure food supply is being put in jeopardy due to the Liberal government's inaction and bureaucratic programs that totally miss the mark.

    We released our farm friendly program yesterday, and the minister finally got around to reading it. That is great. I would like to see him put it in play. We would be happy. That is the sincerest form of flattery to see one's project put into play.

    Would he at least release the outline of his program so farmers could finally start making some plans?

    Hon. Bob Speller (Minister of Agriculture and Agri-Food, Lib.): Mr. Speaker, as I said, I had an opportunity to review with my officials the plan put forward by the opposition.

    I might note that after the opposition heard that the Government of Canada was in the process of bringing forward a program itself, I looked at it, and in a lot of ways it mimics what is already being done by the Government of Canada.

    If we look at the numbers within it, I think they are quite off in a number of the different areas. However, I would be pleased to have officials at committee, at some time, go through it with the hon. member as to what the real numbers are.

Back to top

February 26, 2004

    Hon. Lorne Nystrom (Regina—Qu'Appelle, NDP): Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Minister of Agriculture and Agri-Food. We are now in a farm income crisis in Canada. In fact, Statistics Canada reports that realized net farm income in our country last year was a negative, at minus $13.4 million, the lowest since statistics started being kept in the 1920s. On top of that, the livestock industry, because of BSE, is in turmoil. Farmers need help immediately.

    I ask the minister whether or not he will consider introducing legislation that would have a program of interest free loans for livestock and grain farmers in this country so they can pay some bills and stay on the farm.

    Hon. Bob Speller (Minister of Agriculture and Agri-Food, Lib.): Mr. Speaker, I agree with the hon. member that in fact this is a crisis out there in agriculture across this country today. That is why the Prime Minister and I and many members of the cabinet have been out talking with farmers and farm groups across the country to see what more we, plus the provinces, can do to help. I am presently meeting with a number of different groups, the Canadian Federation of Agriculture, which I met today, and the Canadian Cattlemen's Association, to see where we as governments can move further.

    Mr. Gerry Ritz (Battlefords—Lloydminster, CPC): Mr. Speaker, what is really scandalous is the 10 months that have sneaked by when we were waiting for the Liberal government to recognize the evidence of the increasing hurt faced by our livestock producers. Like any business, farmers need market certainty and cash flow to survive. Any farm group would have told the minister that yesterday.

    Why does it continue to be so impossible for the government to design a plan that works for our producers? Get it done.

    Hon. Bob Speller (Minister of Agriculture and Agri-Food, Lib.): Mr. Speaker, in fact we have responded. We responded with a $520 million program on BSE. We responded with a $200 million program on cull cow. We also responded with a $600 million transition program to help transition from the old programs to the new program.

    We are working very closely with the Canadian Cattlemen's Association, the Canadian Federation of Agriculture and our provincial colleagues to address some of these concerns.

    I invite the hon. member to sit down with the cattlemen. Maybe they would tell him about the approach--

    The Speaker: The hon. member for Battlefords--Lloydminster.

    Mr. Gerry Ritz (Battlefords—Lloydminster, CPC): Mr. Speaker, all those farm groups are telling the minister to get off his duff and get it done. We need cash flow today.

    All these big programs that the government talked about, the dollars never went to where they were intended. They did not get there.

    CFIP paid out 70%. That is the government's answer to the solution.

    Why are families who produce our safe quality food never a priority for the Liberal government?

    Hon. Bob Speller (Minister of Agriculture and Agri-Food, Lib.): Mr. Speaker, they are a priority for the government. The Government of Canada, my cabinet colleagues and indeed the Prime Minister recognize the situation of farmers and farm families across the country. That is why the Prime Minister has taken such a large lead in terms of dealing with the BSE situation.

    I can assure all hon. members and indeed farmers and farm families across the country that the Government of Canada does take this issue very seriously. We are working very hard in terms of opening up the border. We are working very hard with our provincial colleagues, along with the farm groups in order to make sure that the money that is--

    The Speaker: The hon. member for Thornhill.

    Mr. Mario Laframboise (Argenteuil—Papineau—Mirabel, BQ): Mr. Speaker, the statements by the Minister of Agriculture and Agri-Food about supply management are confusing. On the one hand, the minister is reaffirming that he will defend supply management, but he recognizes at the same time that there will be opposition around the table and even added, “We do not have much support”. The minister's hesitations weaken his position.

    Does the Minister of Agriculture and Agri-Food intend to eliminate all ambiguity and clearly reaffirm his commitment to defending the supply management system, as it currently exists in Quebec and Canada?

    Hon. Bob Speller (Minister of Agriculture and Agri-Food, Lib.): Mr. Speaker, from back in the days of the hon. Eugene Whalen through many ministers of agriculture within the Liberal Party of Canada, we have stood firmly behind supply management. I would question if there is that stand in other parties in the House.

Back to top

February 25, 2004

    The Speaker: It is my duty to inform the House, pursuant to Standing Order 81(14), that the motion to be considered tomorrow during consideration of the business of supply is as follows:

 
    That the government reallocate its resources from wasteful and unnecessary programs such as the gun registry and the sponsorship program to address the agricultural crisis at the farm gate across Canada.

    This motion standing in the name of the hon. member for Macleod is votable.

    Copies of the motion are available at the table.

Back to top

February 23, 2004

    Mr. Gary Schellenberger (Perth—Middlesex, CPC): Mr. Speaker, there are reports today in the press that the Minister of Agriculture is delaying additional help to cattle producers until all the provinces agree to the details of his program. The provinces have repeatedly stepped up to the plate without the participation of the federal government.

    Will the minister stop fighting with his provincial colleagues and announce, unconditionally, the program today?

    Hon. Mark Eyking (Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Agriculture and Agri-Food (Agri-Food), Lib.): Mr. Speaker, we have a good relationship with the provincial ministers. Many of the programs that we unfolded over the last eight months were in agreement with the provinces. We will not stop there. We will work on new programs, and we do have a good relationship.

    Mr. Gary Schellenberger (Perth—Middlesex, CPC): Mr. Speaker, the provinces have taken the initiative and left the federal government and that minister behind in helping their farmers cope with the BSE crisis. Almost every province has initiated individual programs, so the minister cannot use the provinces as a reason to hold up his new program that he is planning to announce.

    Will the minister stop using the provinces as his excuse and actually do something for our cattle producers rather than just talking about it?

    Hon. Mark Eyking (Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Agriculture and Agri-Food (Agri-Food), Lib.): Mr. Speaker, over the last year we have put out $5 billion with the provinces. We are unrolling CAISP as we speak and the cull cow program. Hon. members should look at the figures and check the facts.

Back to top

February 20, 2004

    Mr. Gerry Ritz (Battlefords—Lloydminster, CPC): There you go, Mr. Speaker, if you have nothing to say, say it loudly.

    The Minister of Agriculture must realize by now that the agriculture sector in this country cannot heal itself.

    Two weeks ago he said that he would go back to cabinet and ask for more money for our cash-strapped farmers.

    I would like to know when he pled his case with cabinet and when farmers across the country can expect a bankable program.

    Hon. Mark Eyking (Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Agriculture and Agri-Food (Agri-Food), Lib.): Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank the hon. member for asking me my first question in the House. I will try to do my best to answer it.

    Over the last eight months beef farmers have faced a crisis. We have many programs in place, such as the NISA program and the BSE program. We also had the CAISP rolling out last month in which we put $15 million. We also have the cull program that will be coming out. We are just waiting for inventories from the provinces.

    I can assure the hon. member that we will be there for the farmers with more programs in the upcoming months.

    Mr. Gerry Ritz (Battlefords—Lloydminster, CPC): Mr. Speaker, I thank the parliamentary secretary for staying true to Liberal form and not really giving us an answer.

    For the first time in history Statistics Canada shows a negative $13 million balance for all agricultural sectors across the country. That is everybody. The primary producers of our safe quality food supply are in peril. They are going down hard.

    Since the government is powerless to re-open borders, will it at least redesign its programs to get money to the farm gate? That is the trick.

    Hon. Mark Eyking (Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Agriculture and Agri-Food (Agri-Food), Lib.): Mr. Speaker, we are dealing with this from all angles. We are dealing with it on an international level in Washington and we are also dealing with it at the local level.

    In 2002, $3.5 billion went to farmers. Last year we paid over $5 billion to farmers. We will be paying more.

    Mrs. Lynne Yelich (Blackstrap, CPC): Mr. Speaker, the agriculture industry is the third largest employer of Canadians. It is one of our top five industries. Agriculture is in a crisis. The industry is sinking and the farmers are going down. Their loans are being called in. The industry is on the verge of collapse. This is an emergency and needs to be treated like an emergency.

    I would like the Deputy Prime Minister to tell me if she will ask the Prime Minister to take emergency measures to address this crisis and to do it now.

    Hon. Mark Eyking (Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Agriculture and Agri-Food (Agri-Food), Lib.): Mr. Speaker, we are taking measures on all angles to deal with this agriculture issue. It is not the third but the second most important industry in this country. We are dealing with it in Washington. We are dealing with it on an international basis. We are dealing with the farmers and we are working with the stakeholders and the beef industry to deal with this issue down in the United States.

    Mrs. Lynne Yelich: Mr. Speaker, I rise on a point of order. I want to make a correction to what the parliamentary secretary said when he quoted me as saying that agriculture was not the third but the second most important industry in Canada. My words were “It was the third largest employer and one of the top five industries of the nation”. I did not say as he indicated. I would like that corrected.

    The Deputy Speaker: The House will recognize that is not respectfully a point of order. The matter of clarification has been put on the record in the House.

Back to top

February 18, 2004

    Mrs. Lynne Yelich (Blackstrap, CPC): Mr. Speaker, the BSE crisis has put our agriculture industry on the brink of disaster.

    In Saskatchewan net farm income is down 177%. Imagine the Liberal action we would see if that party fell that fast and hard in the polls.

    While the Prime Minister busies himself with scandal, the agriculture industry is sinking. Where do the farmers turn? Why does the Prime Minister have time and money for his Liberal friends but nothing for our struggling farmers?

    Hon. Bob Speller (Minister of Agriculture and Agri-Food, Lib.): Mr. Speaker, I appreciate a question on agriculture in the House today. It highlights the importance of the desperate situation being faced by many farmers and farm families across this country.

    The Government of Canada has responded. We responded in terms of BSE. We have also brought in a new program, CAISP, that will help farmers in the future deal with their farm income situation.

    The Government of Canada clearly recognizes the trouble in agriculture today and we are working to resolve it.

    The Speaker: The right hon. Prime Minister on a point of order.

Back to top

February 6, 2004

    Mr. Rick Borotsik (Brandon—Souris, CPC): Mr. Speaker, we heard this week in a debate in this very House that the cattle industry is suffering its worst crisis ever.

    We all agree farmers and ranchers need cash and they need it now. Rather than waste money on gun registries and sponsorship programs, can the Minister of Agriculture not find a way to get cash into producers' pockets now?

    Hon. R. John Efford (Minister of Natural Resources, Lib.): Mr. Speaker, as we are talking here in this hon. House today, the Minister of Agriculture is out in Calgary meeting with the farmers.

    In 2003, $5 billion flowed through the agriculture industry and the farming industry in Canada. As we are talking here today, the minister is out there ensuring that money will be flowing to the farmers as soon as they make the request and all the farmers who will be impacted will receive sufficient moneys.

    Mr. Rick Borotsik (Brandon—Souris, CPC): Mr. Speaker, all of that rhetoric does not help the producers and the farmers right now.

    It is obvious that the infusion of a new minister does not equate to an infusion of cash into the producers' pockets. The fact is that there has been no money flowing to the agriculture producers. We cannot wait for two years to get a flawed program kicked in so producers can get cash. When we need it is now, immediately now, tomorrow. Will the minister admit to an immediate cash infusion into the agricultural industry?

    Hon. R. John Efford (Minister of Natural Resources, Lib.): Mr. Speaker, if the hon. member calls $5 billion in 2003 and $4 billion now as rhetoric, then I do not understand the question he is asking.

    Money is flowing through. As we are talking now, the Minister of Agriculture is in Calgary today. The money will go directly to the farmers now, not next year.

Back to top

February 5, 2004

    Hon. Charles Caccia (Davenport, Lib.): Mr. Speaker, given that Canadian farmers' groups, including the National Farmers Union and the Canadian Wheat Board, oppose the release of Monsanto's genetically modified wheat variety because of a potential loss of premium markets, does the Minister of Agriculture and Agri-food intend to turn down Monsanto's application?

    Hon. Bob Speller (Minister of Agriculture and Agri-Food, Lib.): Mr. Speaker, I want to thank the hon. member for his interest in Canadian farmers and farm families. As the hon. member should know, the Government of Canada has a science based regulatory system which assures Canadian consumers and world markets that in fact the food they eat is not only some of the highest quality but some of the safest food in the world.

    An environmental assessment is a key component of this. The hon. member can be assured that nothing will go on the market until it is first studied in terms of its environmental impact, its impact on animal feed and also its impact on--

    The Speaker: The hon. member for Champlain.

Back to top

October 9, 2003

    Mr. Gilbert Barrette (Témiscamingue, Lib.): Mr. Speaker, from what I understand, Quebec is signing its Agriculture Policy Framework implementation agreement today.

    Will the Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Agriculture and Agri-Food tell us what this means for Quebec's farmers?

    Mr. Claude Duplain (Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Agriculture and Agri-Food, Lib.): Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague for his question. This is good news for farmers in his riding and the entire province of Quebec. Today the Minister of Agriculture and Agri-Food is in Trois-Rivières to sign the APF implementation agreement with Quebec. I think we need to thank and congratulate Quebec. This is very good news.

    Some hon. members: Bravo.

    Mr. Claude Duplain: Quebec will receive nearly $88 million from the federal government over the next five years for the four components of the framework. Quebec and Canada will commit to paying $304 million over three years to ease the transition. Moreover, with the Agricultural Policy Framework and its risk management program, farmers will be able to receive money immediately.

Back to top

October 2, 2003

    Mrs. Carol Skelton (Saskatoon—Rosetown—Biggar, Canadian Alliance): Mr. Speaker, Saskatchewan bison, sheep and cervid farmers desperately need to sell their meat to international markets. The problem is that there is no federally licensed slaughter facility in Saskatchewan.

    What is the agriculture minister going to do to help these Saskatchewan farmers market and export their products?

    Hon. Lyle Vanclief (Minister of Agriculture and Agri-Food, Lib.): Mr. Speaker, we will certainly continue to emphasize and demonstrate to the purchasers of ruminant products around the world that we and our industry have been providing for the safety of ruminant products including those that the hon. member is referring to.

    The provinces have provincially inspected plants. Those are privately owned. There are federally inspected plants. I do know that some of the owners of those plants are looking at changing the status of their plants to federally inspected plants. In so doing we will work with them to assist them in any way we can.

    Mrs. Carol Skelton (Saskatoon—Rosetown—Biggar, Canadian Alliance): Mr. Speaker, border restrictions are a major problem, not just for selling their products but also for qualifying for compensation.

    The compensation program demands that bison, sheep and cervid butchering happens at an approved facility, the meat is sold and that it is documented. With the glut of meat on the market right now producers cannot do this.

    What is the agriculture minister going to do to ensure that these Saskatchewan producers are compensated?

    Hon. Lyle Vanclief (Minister of Agriculture and Agri-Food, Lib.): Mr. Speaker, I certainly do not think that the hon. member is suggesting that slaughtered meat that is sold is not inspected and not slaughtered whether it be in provincially or federally inspected plants. I know she is not saying that.

    However the business risk management programs are there. She could encourage those provinces that have not signed it to sign the agreement so that the money can be moved.

    I will repeat it again. We have hundreds of millions of dollars to assist farmers as their incomes change because of circumstances like this. We would sincerely like to move that money to farmers.

Back to top

September 26, 2003

    Mrs. Carol Skelton (Saskatoon—Rosetown—Biggar, Canadian Alliance): Mr. Speaker, we have been asking the government for months about a marketing strategy for Canadian beef.

    Public trust must be restored. Where is the public ad campaign to promote the beef industry and what is the government's plan?

    Hon. Lyle Vanclief (Minister of Agriculture and Agri-Food, Lib.): Mr. Speaker, the hon. member knows very well that through the work of the government and the industry it is being demonstrated very clearly that the Canadian beef product is completely safe. It has been recognized by other countries in the world by opening their borders in ways that have never happened before as far as receiving product from a BSE country goes.

    That has also been recognized in the numbers. Canadian consumers purchased 62% more beef in July of this year than last year and 72% more in August than they did last year. The beef is moving and we just need to continue to work--

    The Deputy Speaker: The hon. member for Saskatoon—Rosetown—Biggar.

    Mrs. Carol Skelton (Saskatoon—Rosetown—Biggar, Canadian Alliance): Mr. Speaker, that is an excellent answer from the member whose government gives millions to millionaires and pennies to seniors.

    Other livestock industries are being affected by the BSE scare: sheep, bison and cervids. Borders and markets must be opened and kept open for these Canadian products as well. Where is the government's plan for marketing alternative livestock?

    Hon. Lyle Vanclief (Minister of Agriculture and Agri-Food, Lib.): Mr. Speaker, when the markets in the United States opened and when the markets in Mexico were opened those markets were opened in the very same way for the other ruminants, for all the other ruminants, as they have been for beef. The hon. member knows that. I am sure she read the press release. I am sure she read the information that is out there.

    It is the science, it is the record of the Canadian beef industry and it is the work of our processing plants and the work of the Canadian Food Inspection Agency that have had recognition given to Canada that has not been given to any other country in the world. We will keep building on that.

    Mrs. Carol Skelton (Saskatoon—Rosetown—Biggar, Canadian Alliance): Mr. Speaker, the Canadian livestock industry is going to change its name to Bombardier.

    Canadian producers know that until our borders open to year round access to American feeder cattle the American border will remain closed to ours. This has been an issue for 10 years. Will the government agree to reverse its position and get all the borders open?

    Hon. Lyle Vanclief (Minister of Agriculture and Agri-Food, Lib.): Mr. Speaker, the hon. member fails to realize, so I will remind her and others again, that no other countries have had the borders opened such as we have. Unfortunately, we had a cow back in May with BSE, which puts us in the category that we are now a BSE country. Other countries in the world usually do not import products from countries that had a case of BSE, but our track record, our science and the work that has been done, that has been the strategy, and it is working.

    Mr. Marcel Gagnon (Champlain, BQ): Mr. Speaker, since the federal government refused to take its responsibilities, the Government of Quebec was forced to launch the second phase of its own plan to help farm producers who are victims of the mad cow crisis.

    The minister should stop talking about the agricultural policy framework because farmers simply do not want it. Does the minister intend to implement a specific program for dealing with the mad cow crisis, as requested by farmers?

[English]

    Hon. Lyle Vanclief (Minister of Agriculture and Agri-Food, Lib.): Mr. Speaker, I am certainly ready to help farmers more than we have to date and we are already for those provinces that have signed the implementation agreement. That implementation agreement is there with the province of Quebec.

    I have had signing authority since last spring and would be more than pleased to sign that document. That will move even more money into the province of Quebec to help beef farmers and other farmers.

Back to top

September 25, 2003

    Mr. Gerry Ritz (Battlefords—Lloydminster, Canadian Alliance): Mr. Speaker, yesterday the Minister for Agriculture hid behind the beef value roundtable he claims he instigated last June. That very roundtable designed a comprehensive plan to deal with the escalating problem of cull cows. The minister rejected its plan as out of hand and replaced it with what? Silence, and lots of it.

    Is the minister stalling so his new boss will get the credit for resolving this or does he just not really have a plan?

    Hon. Lyle Vanclief (Minister of Agriculture and Agri-Food, Lib.): Mr. Speaker, the beef roundtable and the Canadian Cattlemen's Association made a presentation to myself and all the provincial ministers Monday morning of this week. The hon. member knows full well that after that meeting we all said that it was the desire of everyone to use the over $500 million that was left first to help address this situation and then we would go from there.

    It was very clear and it was a decision made by the federal government and the provincial governments at a federal-provincial meeting, and the ministers from all the provinces agreed to it.

    Mr. Gerry Ritz (Battlefords—Lloydminster, Canadian Alliance): Mr. Speaker, if that line were actually true and if he really were telling us the truth here, he would have no problem getting the last signatures on his APF.

    The livestock industry is only the latest victim of the Liberal government's inability to deal with international trade issues. Nobody can wait another six months to see if they can trigger any--

    Some hon. members: Oh, oh.

    The Deputy Speaker: I encourage the member for Battlefords--Lloydminster to be judicious in his words.

    Mr. Gerry Ritz: Mr. Speaker, the problem is that no producers can wait another six months to see if they can trigger any payout from the minister's Russian roulette support programs.

    When will the minister table a national plan that will actually address the health of our livestock industry? When is he will he do that?

    Hon. Lyle Vanclief (Minister of Agriculture and Agri-Food, Lib.): Mr. Speaker, I announced on September 19 $600 million to flow to Canadian farmers. A number of provinces have already signed bilateral agreements which will allow producers to apply for interim agreements.

    By the way, Mr. Speaker, I told the truth earlier as well.

Back to top

September 24, 2003

    Mr. Paul Steckle (Huron—Bruce, Lib.): Mr. Speaker, during the debate yesterday on the extensive efforts that the government has undertaken to open the American border to Canadian cattle, I heard the Minister of Agriculture and Agri-Food mention that he had recently announced details of $600 million for agriculture producers.

    Can the minister inform the House whether cattle ranchers will be receiving a share of this $600 million? While they are grateful that the border is open to Canadian beef, they will continue to experience financial pain until live cattle can be exported to the United States.

   Hon. Lyle Vanclief (Minister of Agriculture and Agri-Food, Lib.): Mr. Speaker, certainly they will receive a portion of the $600 million in transition funds as they did last year and as they will this year.

    The hon. member knows it is through the work of the government, the Prime Minister, the Deputy Prime Minister, cabinet colleagues, MPs and the industry, that every effort is being made and has been made, and will continue to be made. We will not rest until we have the border completely open into the United States.

    With reference to the $600 million, yes, that will flow to all farmers in all provinces, as it did last year, within a very few weeks. For example, last year, it meant $110 million to Ontario farmers and over $180 million to Saskatchewan farmers.

    Ms. Pauline Picard (Drummond, BQ): Mr. Speaker, even if the U.S. embargo on beef has been partially lifted, producers are continuing to lose money and are desperately calling for help. The assistance plan ended on August 31, and the Fédération des producteurs de bovins finds it totally unacceptable that the government is refusing to announce phase two.

    What is keeping the Minister of Agriculture and Agri-food from answering the appeal of the government and the cattle producers of Quebec, and from immediately implementing a second phase of the assistance plan for the cattle industry, which has been so hard hit by the mad cow crisis?

[English]

    Hon. Lyle Vanclief (Minister of Agriculture and Agri-Food, Lib.): Mr. Speaker, as I said yesterday in the House and as I have said a number of times, we did. The federal government put $312 million into the BSE recovery program. The provincial governments added more money. I announced last week $600 million moving to farmers. There is still over $500 million available.

    Let us sign up and use up that money first and then we will go from there.

[Translation]

    Ms. Pauline Picard (Drummond, BQ): Mr. Speaker, the minister keeps on telling us about his famous agricultural strategic framework, but what is needed is not that, but an assistance plan.

    The Fédération des producteurs de bovins has made it clear: the strategic framework the minister is so anxious to sign does not meet the needs of producers. They want a specific assistance plan.

    Why is the minister so insensitive to the drama that is going on in the various regions of Quebec?

[English]

    Hon. Lyle Vanclief (Minister of Agriculture and Agri-Food, Lib.): Mr. Speaker, there is still over $500 million left in money to move to Canadian farmers. Many of those who will trigger that will be beef farmers.

    We will move that money to beef farmers and to other farmers out there that need that support. Then we will talk about where we go from there if that is not sufficient.

Back to top

September 23, 2003

    Mr. Peter MacKay (Pictou—Antigonish—Guysborough, PC): Mr. Speaker, the Minister of Agriculture's deadlock with the provinces is holding farmers hostage. His refusal to compensate farm families on the brink of bankruptcy until the remaining provinces sign on to the agriculture policy framework is callous and mean-spirited.

    In the meantime, the Canadian agriculture sector is facing its biggest crisis since the Depression.

    When can farm families expect the minister to live up to his own government's commitments and start the flow of compensation? It is a liquidity issue. They need the money now.

    Hon. Lyle Vanclief (Minister of Agriculture and Agri-Food, Lib.): Mr. Speaker, the hon. member should be aware that last Friday I announced $600 million in transition funding to farmers across the country. That is on top of the $312 million from the federal government, plus the provincial money, as far as the BSE recovery program is concerned.

    The hon. member also knows from his experience, legal and otherwise, that there has to be agreements and signatures before money can be moved. Three or four provinces have refused to sign federal-provincial agreements which would allow us to move hundreds of millions of dollars to those provinces.

    Mr. Peter MacKay (Pictou—Antigonish—Guysborough, PC): Mr. Speaker, that is blackmail. That is blaming the provinces again. His government's inability to strike compromise with provinces and other nations is legendary. When will the minister give up on this stubborn refusal to work with the agriculture sector on this critical file?

    I ask the minister, I ask the Prime Minister and I ask his understudy, when will they get fully engaged on this file? What discussions does the Minister of Agriculture currently have under way with his counterpart in the United States? When will he come forward with a comprehensive plan to get the US border open to Canadian cattle? When will he do that?

    Hon. Lyle Vanclief (Minister of Agriculture and Agri-Food, Lib.): Mr. Speaker, in the last number of months, we have had directly and indirectly, because I have kept track of them, close to 100 interventions with the United States. We have had face to face meetings, phone calls of diplomats, the Prime Minister, the Deputy Prime Minister, my colleague the trade minister, the industry, the food inspection agency and I can go on.

    As far as working with the provinces, I have had signing authority since May. The provinces just need to sign the papers so we can flow the money to the farmers. We know they need money. Those provinces are not even committing their 40%--

    The Speaker: The hon. member for Vancouver East.

Back to top

September 22, 2003

    Mrs. Carol Skelton (Saskatoon—Rosetown—Biggar, Canadian Alliance): Mr. Speaker, today the agriculture minister is holding meetings with his provincial counterparts. There is little expectation that the government and the minister will bring anything new and useful to the table.

    What will the agriculture minister offer to the provinces other than blackmailing them into signing the agriculture policy framework?

    Hon. Lyle Vanclief (Minister of Agriculture and Agri-Food, Lib.): Mr. Speaker, I will repeat again, there are hundreds of millions of dollars that the federal government has available for the provinces. Some provinces have not even agreed to put their 40% with that, so their industry should be asking those provinces why they are not there to support them.

    As well, last Friday I announced the payment to the farmers of the second $600 million transitional fund. That will be there to help producers and that will go to all farmers across Canada whether they sign the implementation agreement or not.

    Mrs. Carol Skelton (Saskatoon—Rosetown—Biggar, Canadian Alliance): Mr. Speaker, the agriculture minister can do a lot of extra talking but the borders are still closed to all livestock in this country.

    For years Canadian cattlemen have called for year round access to American feeder cattle. Uncertainty is the last thing that the cattle industry needs right now.

    The minister needs to answer the important question for our farmers. When will his government allow year round access to American feeder cattle so that for once and for all we can get this border open?

    Hon. Lyle Vanclief (Minister of Agriculture and Agri-Food, Lib.): Mr. Speaker, I know that is an issue with the beef cattlemen. It is also an issue with the dairy industry which has concerns about that as well, and they are different from what they are for the beef industry. It is an also an issue as far as health is concerned.

    I have asked the Canadian Food Inspection Agency to do another review of the level of risk. That will be done as quickly as we possibly can to ensure that whatever action is taken we have the level of risk in reference to those specific diseases, bluetongue and anaplasmosis, as low as possibly can be.

    Mr. Dick Proctor (Palliser, NDP): Mr. Speaker, one mad cow equals 90,000 angry farmers, and today we can add several provincial agricultural ministers to the list, because the federal agriculture minister told his provincial counterparts earlier today that the BSE recovery program cannot be extended without running the risk of countervail.

    How is it that the United States and the European Union can add additional programs to assist their farmers but every time it happens in this country the government cries countervail?

    Hon. Lyle Vanclief (Minister of Agriculture and Agri-Food, Lib.): Mr. Speaker, I do not think the hon. member understands very clearly many of the rules as far as the WTO is concerned. It depends on how one does it.

    Clearly the beef industry has indicated to us that it does not want any action taken which might subject it to scrutiny by the United States under countervail or anti-dumping. The experience of that in the pork industry and the grains industry and some other industries has been very expensive in the past, and the provincial ministers, when we put the BSE recovery program in place, agreed at that time that when the borders started to open the program would end. They have known it since the beginning of the program.

    Mr. Dick Proctor (Palliser, NDP): Mr. Speaker, farmers and agriculture ministers at the provincial level are frankly tired of national agricultural programs that never seem to work.

    The BSE crisis is a case in point. Three Prairie provinces have all kicked in additional money over and above the 60-40 that this government always says has to be done, and incidentally, the federal government has not paid its share. The United States, more importantly, is aware of these provincial add-ons but is not taking any action because it understands the length and depth of the crisis that we have.

    Again, my question is, how can the Minister of Agriculture justify the countervail bogeyman as an excuse once more?

    Hon. Lyle Vanclief (Minister of Agriculture and Agri-Food, Lib.): Mr. Speaker, the federal government will pay its full share of the 60-40 BSE recovery program. I might suggest that if the hon. member really wanted the farmers in his province to benefit from the money that is there to help farmers across this country, he would go back home and convince the provincial minister in his own province that they sign on to the agricultural policy framework, because by not doing so they have not even committed their 40% to the programs and the money that is there for the farmers into the future.

Back to top

September 16, 2003

    Hon. Charles Caccia (Davenport, Lib.): Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Minister of Agriculture and it concerns the United Nations biosafety protocol.

    Given that 57 nations have ratified the biosafety protocol, given the fact that it has entered into force and given that Canada is host to the UN Secretariat on Biodiversity, when will the minister be in a position to give the green light so that the government can ratify this important protocol?

[Translation]

    Mr. Claude Duplain (Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Agriculture and Agri-Food, Lib.): Mr. Speaker, the Government of Canada has a strong interest in the conservation and sustainable use of biodiversity and supports the environmental objectives of the protocol on biosafety.

    Canada signed this protocol in 2001 and is committed to addressing the concerns of stakeholders in the agri-food and biotechnology industries.

    The agri-food sectors support the protocol's goals and have agreed to work with us in accordance with the protocol and to minimize the uncertainties related to trade.

Back to top

September 15, 2003

Hon. Charles Caccia (Davenport, Lib.): Mr. Speaker, my question is addressed to the minister responsible for the Canadian Wheat Board.

    According to Ken Ritter, the chair of the Canadian Wheat Board, 82% of the board's customers say they do not want to use genetically engineered wheat.

    Does the minister agree with the position taken by the Wheat Board's customers and the board's opposition to Monsanto's application to cultivate and market genetically engineered wheat in Canada?

    Hon. Ralph Goodale (Minister of Public Works and Government Services, Minister responsible for the Canadian Wheat Board and Federal Interlocutor for Métis and Non-Status Indians, Lib.): Mr. Speaker, as all hon. members will know, given our painful experience this summer with BSE, it is important to take a science based approach to cross-border trade issues. That having been said, I have a great deal of concern about the same things the Canadian Wheat Board is concerned about. We do not want to lose either markets or market share. A great deal of work therefore remains to be done to ensure intelligent and responsible behaviour in respect of genetically modified products.

    The government is working very closely with the Canadian grains industry and other stakeholders, including the Canadian Wheat Board, to determine how best to proceed in a responsible manner.

    Mr. Rick Casson (Lethbridge, Canadian Alliance): Mr. Speaker, with the collapse of the trade talks in Cancun, Canadian agriculture producers have been dealt yet another blow. Producers in Canada have been placing their future hopes on these negotiations.

    The Minister for International Trade stated that WTO members must redouble their efforts to build bridges and find consensus. The minister needs to redouble his efforts to build bridges in his own backyard. Canadian producers are hurting. When will the Liberal government rebuild damaged relationships with our farmers and our international trading partners?

    Mr. Murray Calder (Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for International Trade, Lib.): Mr. Speaker, everybody knows that there was nothing in the draft agreement that was agreed to in Cancun, but additional insights have been gained and that will lead to further discussions which will be taking place on December 15 in Geneva when the WTO group meets again.

    Mr. Rick Casson (Lethbridge, Canadian Alliance): Mr. Speaker, Liberal policies continue to destroy international relationships and alienate and harm our Canadian farmers.

    When will the government deal with opening the Canada-U.S. border to live cattle? When will it deal with high tariffs placed on grain farmers? When will it deal with restricted market access to agriculture producers?

    Why is the Liberal government continuing to harm our Canadian agriculture producers?

[Translation]

    Mr. Claude Duplain (Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Agriculture and Agri-Food, Lib.): Mr. Speaker, Canada went to Cancun to agree on a framework document on agriculture that would allow us to continue to pursue our negotiation objectives, in other words, the elimination of export subsidies, maximum reduction of internal support that distorts trade, and true improvements to market access for all agri-food products, which is very important to us.

Back to top

June 13, 2003

    Mr. Charlie Penson (Peace River, Canadian Alliance): Mr. Speaker, I do not think bringing in the Rolling Stones is going to solve that problem.

    It is estimated that by next week, losses to the livestock industry will be over $1 billion due to the BSE scare. The beef industry has rejected the government's latest proposal, saying loans simply are not the answer. As they say, “You cannot borrow yourself out of trouble”.

    Now it appears the government is using this disaster to blackmail the provinces into signing its agricultural policy framework. I ask the minister, will the government introduce a comprehensive compensation package outside of the APF?

    Hon. David Collenette (Minister of Transport, Lib.): Mr. Speaker, once again the opposition does not have the facts. There has been no proposal put on the table because the Minister of Agriculture and Agri-Food is meeting with his counterparts in Vancouver today to discuss this very issue and what can be done.

    Certainly ministers on this side of the House have been working on this particular matter under the leadership of the Minister of Agriculture and Agri-Food for the last number of days. I am certain that the discussions in Vancouver will help the situation and help deal with the very terrible crisis that is faced by producers and others in the country.

    Mr. Charlie Penson (Peace River, Canadian Alliance): Mr. Speaker, that is part of the problem. No proposal will be put on the table. It has been almost a month since this scare started to affect beef producers and it is an economic loss to the livestock industry.

    The president of the Canadian Cattlemen's Association says the minister's BSE compensation plan for loan guarantees is like throwing a rock to a drowning man. The industry needs cash, not more debt.

    I ask again, will the government commit to an immediate cash injection for the feedlot industry that is losing millions of dollars a day?

    Hon. David Collenette (Minister of Transport, Lib.): Mr. Speaker, as I have said, all of these issues are under discussion today in Vancouver.

    The hon. member should recognize that the preoccupation of the Government of Canada and the provincial governments and especially my colleague the Minister of Agriculture and Agri-Food is to deal with the science in this case to ensure that people are well aware that there is no hazard from other animals being infected. The science is now conclusive and is now being analyzed by our friends in the United States. This leads us to some optimism that the border will be opened in the near future.

Back to top

June 11, 2003

    Mr. Yves Rocheleau (Trois-Rivières, BQ): Mr. Speaker, at the end of April the UPA of Grand-Pré and the Envir-Eau-Sol group, which consists of 72 businesses in the regional municipality of Maskinongé, asked the Prime Minister and member for Saint-Maurice personally to guarantee, in their words, “farm income protection systems by increasing the amount provided within the agricultural policy framework so that the Financière du Québec can cover the production costs of our farmers”.

    Can the Prime Minister tell us if he intends to reply in the affirmative to the legitimate demands of these agricultural producers from his riding?

[English]

    Hon. Lyle Vanclief (Minister of Agriculture and Agri-Food, Lib.): Mr. Speaker, we are working with the ministries and the representatives of the agriculture producers across Canada to put in place the announcement that the Prime Minister and I made last June of $5.2 billion in additional new money to help in areas of food safety, business risk management, environment and to help build upon the work that is being done in the provinces already, not to detract from that, but to built upon that.

    Mr. Larry McCormick (Hastings—Frontenac—Lennox and Addington, Lib.): Mr. Speaker, concern has been expressed in the agricultural community that new products being introduced into the market could actually harm the market unless that introduction is done responsibly.

    Could the Minister of Agriculture and Agri-Food tell the House what is being done to ensure the agricultural community does not suffer unnecessary market harm from such new products?

    Hon. Lyle Vanclief (Minister of Agriculture and Agri-Food, Lib.): Mr. Speaker, first, we can all be very proud of the rigorous and science based regulatory system that we have that is world renowned and highly respected around the world. However, even taking that into consideration, we are aware of the implications that could happen, not necessarily that may happen, with the introduction of new products such as the member has referred to.

    I have instructed my department to work with the industry and consult with the industry so we can come up with a process to address that. I believe officials from my department will be at the agriculture standing committee tomorrow and will be able to begin initial discussions on that if the issue is raised there.

Back to top

June 5, 2003

    Mr. Dick Proctor (Palliser, NDP): Mr. Speaker, earlier today at the agriculture committee, there were groups from Saskatchewan concerned about Canada's current export customers. Eighty per cent of them say they will not buy genetically modified wheat.

    Agriculture Canada continues to listen to Monsanto instead of Canadians and the world to have GM wheat licensed here. That would be a disaster because Canadian farmers will lose their markets. Saskatchewan's major farm and local government organizations are in Ottawa today. They are calling on the government to add a market impact analysis.

    Will the government and the minister listen to this advice and commit to a market--

    The Speaker: The hon. Minister of Agriculture and Agri-Food.

    Hon. Lyle Vanclief (Minister of Agriculture and Agri-Food, Lib.): Mr. Speaker, Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada is not involved in reviewing an application for something such as genetically modified wheat. The Canadian Food Inspection Agency and the ministry of health are involved in it. That will be based on science.

    I have said before in the House that we need to take a look at the other concerns that are in the marketplace and with the application and that type of thing. That work is being done by the government.

    Mrs. Carol Skelton (Saskatoon—Rosetown—Biggar, Canadian Alliance): Mr. Speaker, cattle producers have had their farms quarantined. Their herds have been slaughtered, yet they cannot begin to rebuild their herds or their lives until the government drafts restocking guidelines.

    When will the minister release the guidelines that will allow cattle producers to restock their cattle and rebuild their lives?

    Hon. Lyle Vanclief (Minister of Agriculture and Agri-Food, Lib.): Mr. Speaker, there is already a program in place and I know the hon. member is aware of this. When animals have to be put down because of a reportable disease, there is compensation to the owner of each of those animals. As soon as that process is finished, if the individuals wish to take that money and restock their herds, they can do that immediately.

    In regard to the criteria of the United States, I will say again, we need the science and we will complete that science as quickly as possible.

    Mrs. Carol Skelton (Saskatoon—Rosetown—Biggar, Canadian Alliance): Mr. Speaker, there is a lot of science fiction coming from that side of the House.

    Cattle producers are already looking ahead to restocking their farms for the future. These producers are waiting for the CFIA to give them written guidelines for that restocking.

    Can the minister tell us when the CFIA will publish those guidelines to allow for the restocking of farms and to allow the people to get on with their lives?

    Hon. Lyle Vanclief (Minister of Agriculture and Agri-Food, Lib.): Mr. Speaker, I think I am correct in saying that as soon as the quarantine is lifted farms can then start restocking.

    The Speaker: The hon. member for Rimouski-Neigette-et-la-Mitis.

    Some hon. members: Hear, hear.

    Mrs. Rose-Marie Ur (Lambton—Kent—Middlesex, Lib.): Mr. Speaker, I am aware that the responsibility for dead stock removal is under the jurisdiction of the provincial governments. In Ontario, the legislation that deals specifically with this issue is the Dead Animal Disposal Act.

    Although it is clearly stated in provincial legislation that dead stock removal is the responsibility of the provincial government, there have been increasing discussions in the Province of Ontario that the federal government does have a role to play in regard to this matter.

    Could the Minister of Agriculture please tell the House and the residents in the Province of Ontario whether the federal government has a role in the removal of dead stock in Ontario?

    Hon. Lyle Vanclief (Minister of Agriculture and Agri-Food, Lib.): Mr. Speaker, as the hon. member has said, dead stock removal comes under the jurisdiction of the provinces. The provinces are responsible, as well, for groundwater and waste management within their jurisdiction. They have guidelines and standards for that.

    Canadian farmers are well-known and have a good reputation for obeying those standards and guidelines, as are waste and landfill sites. I expect and I know they will live up to both the guidelines and the standards.

 

Back to top

May 29, 2003

    Mr. Dick Proctor (Palliser, NDP): Mr. Speaker, the federal government is trying to force genetically modified food on farmers and consumers both here and abroad. Yesterday, Canada's eccentric uncle, the Prime Minister, was in Europe aiding and abetting the American multinationals while here at home his government has been assisting Monsanto in test plots for adapting genetically modified wheat to the Prairies.

    The list of groups wanting nothing to do with GM includes farmers, the Wheat Board, the milling industry, international customers and most important, our own consumers. When will the government stop jamming genetically modified food down our throats and accept that what is good for GM is not good for Canada?

    Hon. Lyle Vanclief (Minister of Agriculture and Agri-Food, Lib.): Mr. Speaker, the hon. member knows very well that we have a process here in Canada that is the envy of the rest of the world. The assessment is made based on science and the safety of any genetically modified product to humans, animals and to the environment. Even with that, it does not mean that the product goes to market. If it passes, the opportunity is there. There have been a number of cases. For example, a number of years ago there was a genetically modified flax product that did pass and the industry decided not to take it to market.

    Mr. Bernard Bigras (Rosemont—Petite-Patrie, BQ): Mr. Speaker, yesterday the Prime Minister witnessed Canadian GMOs being denied access to the European market. Yet for five years we have been warning the government about the risk of not regulating GMOs.

    How many markets must we be banned from before the government takes its responsibilities and regulates all GMOs?

[English]

    Hon. Lyle Vanclief (Minister of Agriculture and Agri-Food, Lib.): Mr. Speaker, we do regulate GMOs. We regulate GMOs better than any other country in the world. I just gave an answer on how we go about doing it.

    We recognize that there have to be concerns about the marketing of that product. I gave an example of how that has been handled in the past. We will continue basing those decisions on science.

[Translation]

    Mr. Bernard Bigras (Rosemont—Petite-Patrie, BQ): Mr. Speaker, this week the Canadian Wheat Board asked Monsanto to withdraw its request to have genetically modified wheat certified.

    Will the Minister of Agriculture admit that if approved, Monsanto's request would make the Canadian situation even worse and close even more doors on international markets? Does the minister intend to say no to Monsanto, as requested by the Canadian Wheat Board?

[English]

    Hon. Lyle Vanclief (Minister of Agriculture and Agri-Food, Lib.): Mr. Speaker, again I gave an example of a product that passed the tests of the Canadian Food Inspection Agency and the Ministry of Health a few years ago. The developer of that product recognized a concern that had been raised by the Canadian Wheat Board and it was not put on the market. The system can work. That is a good example of the situation and how it can work.

Back to top

May 15, 2003

Mr. David Anderson (Cypress Hills—Grasslands, Canadian Alliance): Mr. Speaker, 2002 was--

    Some hon. members: Oh, oh.

[Translation]

    The Speaker: Order, please. The minister is, of course, very popular, but we need to be able to hear the next question.

[English]

    The hon. member for Cypress Hills—Grasslands now has the floor.

    Mr. David Anderson: Mr. Speaker, 2002 was a challenging year for farmers. They faced drought, grasshoppers, frost and floods. However their greatest challenge has been the Liberal government. Farmers are already out seeding and they still do not have a risk management program. They have no program, no details, no way of knowing what their 2003 coverage is.

    When will the minister release the details of the agricultural policy framework so farmers can make good business decisions for 2003?

    Hon. Lyle Vanclief (Minister of Agriculture and Agri-Food, Lib.): Mr. Speaker, I believe the hon. member was in the standing committee on agriculture a few weeks ago when I went over the proposed program for the producers. That program is out there with the provinces. I have authority from our government to sign the agreements with the provinces, and we will put that in place. One province has already signed so their producers can have that protection for this year, and I await the signatures of all the others.

    Mr. David Anderson (Cypress Hills—Grasslands, Canadian Alliance): Mr. Speaker, farmers are frustrated beyond belief. They did not have much of a program last year and they do not have any program this year. Farm organizations are frustrated. The requests for a one year delay have been totally ignored. Provinces are frustrated. Only one province has signed the implementation agreement for the APF.

    The entire agricultural support system is changing without the average farmer having a clue what the government is doing. When will the minister let farmers know the details of the proposed new risk management program?

    Hon. Lyle Vanclief (Minister of Agriculture and Agri-Food, Lib.): Mr. Speaker, over a week ago I sent a personal letter to every holder of a NISA account in this country to explain the program. That is 160,000 letters that we sent out to explain it to the farmers. At the request of the Canadian Federation of Agriculture and the farm organizations we completed a third party review. The results of that have been published. They said very clearly that the proposed program was better than the programs that we had in the past.

    I repeat that I am awaiting the signatures of the provinces. As soon as the provincial governments sign it, that program will be there for the producers. I urge the hon. member to get--

    The Speaker: The hon. member for Jonquière.

Back to top

May 14, 2003

Mr. Bill Blaikie (Winnipeg—Transcona, NDP): Mr. Speaker, no one likes to be a prop for the Prime Minister, but I was talking about star wars not SARS wars, and I want to ask a question.

    After that brief shining moment of independence we have seen nothing but supine acquiescence on the part of the Prime Minister when it comes to star wars, vetting our marijuana laws in Washington, and now we have the Canadian government joining with the American government in opposing the ban on GMOs in Europe.

    I wonder if this is a sign that someday GM wheat will be imposed on western Canadians whether--

    The Speaker: The Minister of Agriculture and Agri-Food.

    Hon. Lyle Vanclief (Minister of Agriculture and Agri-Food, Lib.): Mr. Speaker, the hon. member knows very well that we have one of the best systems in the world to analyze whether a genetically modified crop is either registered or grown. It is examined by Health Canada and the Canadian Food Inspection Agency for a number of reasons. That process is taking place at the present time. We do not know what the results of that will be.

    As a government we also know that there are a number of factors that must be taken into consideration in addition to that and we are looking at ways in which that can be considered as well.

Back to top

May 13, 2003

Mr. David Anderson (Cypress Hills—Grasslands, Canadian Alliance): Mr. Speaker, last October the minister for the Canadian Wheat Board was informed that the board was illegally taking money from farmers' pooling accounts. It is taking this money to manage and administer national licensing fees which the Wheat Board Act says the government has to pay.

    The minister said he was going to refer the matter to “officials and law officers”. It has been six months since the Canadian Alliance raised this issue. What are the results of the minister's investigation and why is this illegal practice continuing?

    Hon. Ralph Goodale (Minister of Public Works and Government Services, Minister responsible for the Canadian Wheat Board and Federal Interlocutor for Métis and Non-Status Indians, Lib.): Mr. Speaker, I did in fact refer the matter, which was raised by one of the directors of the Canadian Wheat Board, to the board of directors of the board as well as its legal counsel. I asked them to inquire into the matter to see if there was anything to the allegations. I have certainly not been advised to this date that there was anything to substantiate the allegations.

    It is after all a matter of the management of the Canadian Wheat Board, which by law is vested in the hands of the directors.

    Mr. David Anderson (Cypress Hills—Grasslands, Canadian Alliance): Mr. Speaker, it is the board of directors that is breaking the law. The minister in charge of whitewash just cannot get away from that.

    In Australia, licensing fees cost $20 million annually. We cannot even guess how much Canadian farmers have been illegally charged because of the lack of transparency at the Wheat Board and the Canadian Wheat Board directors.

    Does the minister know how much farmers have been charged? Why is he allowing the Canadian Wheat Board and the board of directors to operate illegally outside of the Canadian Wheat Board Act?

    Hon. Ralph Goodale (Minister of Public Works and Government Services, Minister responsible for the Canadian Wheat Board and Federal Interlocutor for Métis and Non-Status Indians, Lib.): Mr. Speaker, there is nothing at all on the public record to support the allegation that the hon. gentleman has just made. The fact of the matter is that this House created a new governance system for the Canadian Wheat Board. The old system of appointed commissioners is gone. There is a modern