38th PARLIAMENT, 1st SESSION
EDITED HANSARD • NUMBER 006
CONTENTS
Tuesday, October 12, 2004

Mr. Ed Komarnicki (Souris—Moose Mountain, CPC): Mr. Chair, I agree that the phenomenon we are facing is unusual and perhaps unprecedented, but it requires action on the part of the government. For 18 months we have not seen the border open. For the best part of the first year, it was hope against hope that it would be open without taking any positive steps to make sure it happened.

Despite all the programs that have been mentioned and all the dollars that have gone in, why are farmers frustrated? Why are they in a desperate situation? Why are they are not getting responses when they ask where the money is, where their entitlement is? Why is it so complicated for the farmers? Many are unable to hire lawyers or accountants to get the forms completed. They must do it themselves. They find they have made errors and they do not get the assistance. When they phone, there are delays. When there are timelines, they are not met.

While the minister is postulating about what needs to happen, farmers and communities are going down. It is real. There is frustration for farmers, real people, in elevators and offices, grown men with tears in their eyes, who are saying that they do not think they can make it through the fall, and we are talking about what we should do.

The big issue is, do we want to preserve our farm industry or do we not? Do we want to save our cattle industry or do we not? If we do, we must take immediate and bold steps and invest some funds. I am not talking $600 million or the $1.6 million. Most of the programs are designed to meet the dollars that the government has set aside as opposed to asking farmers what they need and designing a program to meet those needs. That is lacking. It is not that difficult and it is not that complicated. The programs should be simple and easy for the farmers to understand.

Many of the issues facing the farmers are beyond their control. There is BSE today. Tomorrow it is something else, low commodity prices or world market conditions. We are expecting our farmers to preserve and save our food supply, to preserve an industry by using their equity, by borrowing more money, by mortgaging their farms, carrying the load that our country and their government should be carrying on their behalf.

When something happens that is beyond the control of farmers, our governments must step in immediately and help them out. There needs to be a program designed that is not ad hoc and that is not a knee-jerk reaction, as we have seen.

For instance, the first program put moneys into the pockets of the farmers only to have the cattle dumped on the market. The cattle crisis goes on and the funds are passed over to the packing and slaughter houses. Somehow the government tries to blame the opposition and says that we should have known better. The moneys are going some place else. The government designed the program and ought to know how it works. The minister should take those things into account before the program goes on.

Now we have a stand aside program. It has some value but it will go into feed which will be lost again, and we have no assurances that the market will survive.

We have to look at the big picture. We have to be sure that our farmers and ranchers are backstopped from those kinds of circumstances that are far beyond their control. We need to have a simple process. We do not want to have farmers investing money to join a program, like the CAIS program.

I heard the minister say that it was an income stabilization program. In fact it has requirements of five year averages. Five poor years are still five poor years. The rules are arbitrary. Announcements are made before programs are ready to receive applications. To me, it seems disjointed. It seems to be not well thought out. I realize it is not an easy situation and that it is complicated, but I would ask the government to decide the big issue. Are we going to preserve our farming industry? Are we going to preserve our cattle industry? If we are going to, then we have to meet the need that will meet that result rather than the government saying that it will give a little and try to design a program to meet that bit while it hopes farmers will survive, that they can use their equity and come out the other side.

The industry is being told that it may take a year or two but that it is on its own except for what it gets from the government, which is not very much. It is time to be more specific and bold. It is time to design a program that will preserve our food industry.

Hon. Wayne Easter (Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Agriculture and Agri-Food (Rural Development), Lib.): Mr. Chair, the only comment I want to make is that I want it to be clear that it is our objective on the government side to ensure that farmers indeed do survive. We are trying to be there as best we can for the industry. We have all cited examples tonight of terrible, devastating circumstances that livestock producers and producers of other ruminant commodities are facing.

I live in a rural community. These people are my neighbours. I cited examples earlier tonight of financial problems but also personal problems as a result of the BSE crisis, which the Leader of the Opposition himself admitted was really as a direct result of the closure of the U.S. border.

I want to underline the fact that it is our objective to keep farmers in business. The members opposite can try to make all the political hay they like with this issue if that is their desire to do so. We want to make this system work for producers. We have consulted with the industry. For the last announcement there was quite extensive consultation with the Canadian Cattlemen's Association, the four-pronged approach that we are taking. We desperately hope that those set aside programs will allow the market some normality so that producers can get better prices out of that marketplace while we are ramping up our slaughter capacity. We want to see that happen.

Mr. Ed Komarnicki: Mr. Chair, it is true that the government has a desire to see things happen, a desire to see farmers survive but it will take more than desire. It will take some action. I would like to encourage the minister and his department to have a marketing plan that is not just international, which is important, but an aggressive marketing plan within our country, within our citizenry to say that we need to stand with our farmers.

We need to market our product within Canada. We need to be aggressive in our marketing and ensure that consumption takes place within our country and that we have the production capability to meet that need.

We need to diversify. We need to enlarge our markets but we must take the steps to do this and we must do it now. Our farmers are the most efficient, productive farmers anywhere in the world. They need some assistance from our government, some direct action and something that they can see is a tangible step to actually seeing that something is being done.

In terms of marketing, I have not seen any marketing in our country that would enhance beef sales and purchases to have our consumer stand with our farmer to any major degree. There has been small pointed advertising but nothing significant on a national basis. That is necessary.

Mr. Paul Steckle (Huron—Bruce, Lib.): Mr. Chair, I would like us to reflect for a moment because we have been talking considerably about the government's responsibility to market. As a farmer, as someone who represents an agrarian riding, I know that farmers are great producers. Canadian farmers are the greatest in the world with the best products, but we simply do not know how to market our product. We can get it to the farm gate but we do not know how to return a price for the product that we produce.

Why is it that because it is agriculture we think the government needs to market our product? Why does the agriculture sector not do as the auto industry does, as the aircraft industry does and as so many of our other sectors in the manufacturing field do? They go out and market. Yes we have desks in various parts of the world that help our agricultural communities do that, but we simply do not have frontline professionals who know how to market our product and sell the good of our product. Why is that?

Government should be there to facilitate it but we cannot expect government to sell General Motors cars. Farmers ought to do a better job. I have said that in a kind way, I hope, because that is how I intended to say it.

Mr. Ed Komarnicki: Mr. Chair, farmers are doing well. I am saying the government can step up what it does in general advertising, general programming. That is something the government could do without a lot of dollars and it is something the government is not doing. We can eat Canadian beef. Farmers know that. The government needs to promote that and promote it harder and faster.