Manitoba Committee Hansard — Agriculture and Food Committee, Sitting 6 (37th Legislature, 2nd Session)

37-2-ag6

Manitoba — Debates (Hansard)

Second Session -Thirty-Seventh Legislature of the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba Standing Committee on Agriculture Chairperson Mr. Stan Struthers Constituency of Dauphin-Rob/in Vol. LI No.6- 6:30p.m., Monday, May 7, 2001

!\I em her ACil .lJGlJB, Cris AU .AN, Nancy ASHTON, Steve, lion. ASPER, Linda BARRE'n, Becky, lion. CALDWELL, Drew, lion. CERILU, Marianne CIIOMIAK, Dave, lion. CUMMINGS, Glen OACQlJA Y, Louise DERKACH, Leonard DEWAR, Gregory DOER, Gary, lion. DRIEDGER, Myrna DYCK, Peter ENNS, ll arry FAtJRSCII OU, David FRIESEN, Jean, lion. GERRARD, Jon, lion. GILLESIIAMMER, Harold IIELWER, Edward IIIC KES, George JEN NISSEN, Gerard KORZENIOWSKI, Bonnie LATIILIN, Oscar, lion. LA!IRENDEAU, Marcel LEMIEUX, Ron, lion. LOEWEN, John MACKINTOSH, Gord, Hon. MAGUIRE, Larry MALOWAY, Jim MARTINDALE, Doug McGIFFORD, Diane, lion.

MIIIYCIIUK, MaryAnn, lion. MITCIIELSON, Bonnie MURRAY, Stuart NEVAKSIIONOFF, Tom PEN NER. Jack PENNER. Jim PIT!IRA, Frank PRAZNIK, Darren REID, Dal)l REIMER, Jack ROBINSON, Eric, lion. ROCAN, Denis RONDEAU, Jim SALE, Tim, lion. SANTOS, Conrad SCIIELLENBERG, !larry SCII!ILER, Ron SELINGER, Greg, lion. SMITH, Joy SMITII, Scoll. lion. STEFANSON, I leather STRlJ TIIERS. Stan TWEED. Mervin WOWCIIlJK, Rosann, lion. MANITOBA LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY Thirty-Seventh Legislature Constituency The Maples St. Vital Thompson Riel Inkster Brandon East Radisson Kildonan Ste.

Rose Seine River Russell Selkirk Concordia Charleswood Pembina Lakeside Portage Ia Prairie Wolseley River Heights Minnedosa Gimli Point Douglas Flin Flon St. James The Pas St. Norbert La Verendrye Fort Whyte St. Johns Arthur-Virden Elmwood Burrows Lord Roberts Minto River East Kirkfield Park Interlake Emerson Steinbach Morris Lac du Bonnet Transcona Soulhdale Rupertsland Carman Assiniboia Fort Rouge Wellington Ross mere Springfield St. Boniface Fort Garry Brandon West Tuxedo Dauphin-Roblin Turtle Mountain Swan River Political Affiliation N.D.P. N.D.I'. N.D.P. N.D.P. N.D.P. N.D.P. N.D.P. N.D.P. P.C. P.C. P.C.

N.D.P. N.D.P. P.C. P.C. P.C. P.C. N.D.P. Lib. P.C. P.C. N.D.P. N.D.P. N.D.P. N.D.P. P.C. N.D.P. P.C. N.D.P. P.C. N.D.P. N.D.P. N.D.I'. N.D.I'. I'.C. I'.C. N.D.I'. I'.C. P.C. P.C. I'.C. N.D.I'. I'.C. N.D.I'. I'.C. N.D.P. N.D.P. N.D.P. N.D.P. P.C. N.D.P. I'.C. N.D.P. I'.C. N.D.P. I'.C. N.D P.

379 LEG ISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA STANDING COMMIT TEE ON AGRICUL TURE Monday, May 7, 2001 TIM E - 6:30 p.m. LOCATION - Winn ipeg, Manit oba CHAI RPERSON- Mr. Stan Struth ers (Dauphin-Roblin) VI CE-CHAIRPERSON- Mr. Tom Nevakshonoff (Int erlake) ATTENDAN CE -13 -QUORUM - 6 Members of the Committee present: Hon. Messrs. Gerrard, Lemieux, Smit h (Brandon West), Hon. Ms. Wowchuk Messrs. Cummi ngs, Dewar, Maguire, Nevakshonof f, Penner (Emerson), Pit ura, Schell enberg, Struthers Substitutions: Mr. Aglu gub for Mr. Ashton APPEARING: Mr. Steve Ashton, MLA for Thompson Mr.

Leonard Derkach, MLA for Russell WRITTEN SUBMISSIONS: Mr. Robert Radclif fe, Priva te Ci tiz en Mr. Tony Ri ley, Pri vate Citiz en Ms. Dorothy Brown, Prairie Win ds Clothing MATTERS UNDER DISCUSSION: Al l-Party Resolution on Federal Support for Agricultu re; Proposition presentee par tous les partis au sujet de l'aide federate a !'agricul ture *** Mr. Chair person : Good evening. Will the Standing Commit tee on Agricul ture please come to order. Tonight, the commit tee will be considering the provincia l All-Party Resolution on Federal Support for Agricul ture.

I would li ke to inf orm the committee, that si nce our last meeting, written submissions have been received from Robert Radc lif fe, Tony Ri ley, and Dorothy Brown. Is it the will of the Commit tee to accept these submissions and have them appear in the commit tee transcript for this meeting? [Agreed] Copies of these submissions have been prepared and will now be dis tribu ted to commit tee members. Just before we take questions and comments from members, I have handed out a draft report. It is the draft report to facili t ate the dis cussion here tonight. We need to decide where we are going from here.

I would li ke the members to take a qu ick read of that draft, and, if there are some suggestions that we have, I would be very open to considering any suggestions that mem bers of the commit tee have. Mr. Penner, you had a suggest ion. Mr. Jack Penner (Emerson): Mr. Chairman, I was ju st going to ask how long we were going to accept presenta tions, written and/or oral. I think we need to make a decision, maybe, that the commit tee's hearings have ended, and, theref ore, the acceptance of submissions should probably also end at the same time. Hon.

Rosann Wowch uk (Min ister of Agricultur e and Food): I would agree with Mr. Penner. There is the issue of completion of the report, so that we can get on with the completion of Hansard as well. I would concur that this should be the end of the submissions. Mr. Chair person: Is there agreement amongst the commit tee that the submissions that were dis tributed here this evening be the last that this commit tee accepts? [Agreed] Mr. Leonard Derkach (Russell): Just before we move on, Mr. Chair, I know there may be

380 LEG IS LATIV E ASS EMBLY OF MA NIT OBA May 7, 200 1 other presentations that may be sent in from Manit obans to the minis ter's office. I sti ll think that those should be received and cir culated among the commit tee, but perhaps they will not be recorded in Hansard. I think that we should make that exception for those that may sti ll be coming in. Mr. Cha irperson: Is that a suggestion that is agreeable to the committee? {Agreed] How does the commit tee now wish to proceed with the consideration of the resolution? Mr.

Jack Pen ner: I was wondering whether the min ister might want to give us an overview as to where she and her office are at, and how she mi ght see this whole process now move forward? Comm ittee Substitution Mr. Gregory Dewar (Selkirk): I ju st want to make a commit tee substitution. With leave of the commit tee, I would li ke to move that the honourable Member for The Maples (Mr . Aglugub) replace the honourable Member for Thompson (Mr . Ashton) as a member of the Stand in g Commit tee on Agricu lture, effective immediately.

As per the agreement made in the House on April 19 , 200 I, the House will be officially inf ormed of the substitution in the official records of the committee. Mr. Chair person: It has been moved by Mr. Dewar of Selkirk, with the leave of committee, that the Member for The Maples replace the Member for Thompson, eff ective imm edia tely, on the Stand ing Committee on Agriculture. Is that agreed? {Agreed] ••• Ms. Wowchuk: I would li ke to make a few comments to ju st indic ate to the commit tee as to where the process is going.

As I in di cated at the last committee hearings, I have been in contact with the minis ters from Saskatchewan and Alberta discussing this very issue. Saskatchewan has written to the sta nding commit tee invitin g them to come to Saskat chewan. Alberta is also in support of having the sta ndin g commit tee come out as well. We have also had a letter from Howard Hi lstrom, who is the vice-chair of the federal stand in g committee, supporting us on our call to have the commit tee come to the west. I think that is very im portant. *( 18 :40) We heard from a lot of producers.

I ju st feel it is time that the people in Ottawa came here and saw fir st-hand what the situation is. We know that there is a recess comin g towards the end of May in the House of Commons. That would be the opportune time for them to visit Manitoba. There have been other farm leaders that went to Ottawa. There were people that went this year, but without success of gett in g more suppor t from the federal government. I also want to in dicate to the commit tee that Saskatchewan and Alberta are not in terested in another delegation to Ottawa. What they want is people to come here.

So that is the position on that one. Hansard is in the process of being printed. You have a

summary that Mr. Struthers has di stribu ted for di scussion. Then, I thin k that we have to look at the resolution and see what kin d of amendments we want to make. It would be my thought that we would then work on this resolution and make changes that we would want, and then present a resolution to the House. When I say amend the resolution-when we talk about studyi ng-the commit tee has studied, if we could change the resolution in a way that talks about what we li stened to and what we heard from presenters. There are three sections, three THEREFORE BE IT RESOL VEDs that say study and make recommendations.

I think, given what the people said to us, tha t we could from there change the resolution to reflect what we heard from the presenters, and then have a resolution that would go back to the House . As an example, I will look at the third BE IT FURTHER RESOL YEO that the Standing Commit tee on Agricu lture study and make recommendations with regard to an approach to building and sust ainin g a rural community in Manit oba, inclu din g how to produce growth in value-added and higher value agri cult ure and agrif ood indu stry. We heard a lot about that from the producers. We heard about ethanol produc tion.

We heard about there being an opportunity

May 7, 200 1 LEG IS LATIV E ASSEMBLY OF MANIT OBA 38 1 for sugar beets here in Manitoba. We heard about, for example, li vestock indu stry. So, if we could take the recommendations and comments that we heard from producers in those three areas, such as long-term sustain abili ty, and build those int o a THER EFORE

BE IT RESOLVED, that would then be able to be agreed upon and taken back to the House. It would be my suggestion that tonight we have a bit of a discussion on the draft, and then we talk a bit about how people thin k those THEREF ORE BE IT RESOL VEDs could be amended, and then we would come back a week from tonight to review the amendments and then have a res olution to present to the Hous e that is final resu lt. At that time, the Ha nsard should be very close to being completed as well. Mr.

Jack Penner: We think that the urgency that we heard many farm people, both men and women, approach the commit tee wit h-the urgen cy that many municip al leaders expressed, and the urgency with which the many business people that we heard expressed-sh ould not be underestimated. We saw the emotion before this table in many of the presenters. It is not often that you see men and women cry before making presenta tions to com mit tee, and I think that demonstrated the seriousness of the problems that we are addressing as a commit tee. We believe that the urgency should not be left.

We beli eve that there were two streams of presentations that were made to the committee. One was longer-term suggestions, and one was very imm edia te and very si ncere and very earnest. We believe that the latter should be addressed imme diately, and it should be done by the actions demonstrated by this commit tee. We should ask our Premier (Mr. Doer) to immed iately head up a delegation to Ottawa that would in clude members of th is commit tee, that would inclu de municip al leaders, that would in clude the business sector, as well as leaders of the farm communities.

We belie ve that we should make all attempts to immedia tely address this issue to the other provinces and approach the other premi ers to join in an all-party dele gation to Ottawa. There mi ght be those that say that this mig ht be fut il e, and that it mi ght become too unwieldy. Let me go back in hi story just a wee bit to 19 84- 85 when we had a very similar type of situ ation in the grains and oils eeds sector. There was a group that met in Regina. It was basically the Manitoba farm organization that headed up the ini tia tion of that meeting in Regina.

Out of that meeting in Regina came an agreement that, after the second meeting , they agreed that all of them would go to Ottawa and they would approach the Prime Minis ter and the Minis ter of Fi nance and the Min is ter of Agricultur e to meet with them and to demonstr ate to them how urgent the matter was. Out of that meeting came an in itiative, the lik es of whic h western Canada has not seen before or after, I believe-the special grains programs and the large amounts of money that were paid out during that period of time.

It was clearly a demonstration by the grain companies, the presidents of the grain companies, by many of the presidents of vir tually all the farm organiz ations in western Canada, and indeed, the governments of all the four provinces that joi ned hands and approached Ottawa. It was virtually impossible for Ottawa to say no. I think that sort of action should be taken now. It should be headed up by our Premier (Mr. Doer) of this prov ince. We are the all- party group that first agreed that we should set our politics aside and approach this and hear Manit obans' concerns.

I think others have seen now, Saskatchewan and Alberta, maybe even British Columbia-! have talked to some produc ers in Ontario, and they have watched us very closely. I am sure that many of them in Ontario would join us in our effort, if we ju st asked them. So I believe there is a real opportunity for the provinces to stand in a unit ed way to approach the federal government to extend a helping hand in a moment of dir e need. I have received numerous phone calls this last week asking what is happening; how come we are not hearing anyth ing from the commit tee.

So I said to them that we had jointly agreed to meet on Monday. We could have poi nted fingers, but we did not. We said this is far too imp ortant to play politics with. So we said we will meet on

382 LEG IS LATI VE AS SEM BLY OF MA NIT OBA May 7, 200 1 Monday and we will make some decisions, and hopefully, soon after the Monday meeting, you are going to hear of the in itiatives that have been taken by this Prov ince. * (18 :50) We, as a commit tee, I think, have done our job. We have heard the people. The people have been very si ncere in express ing the views that need to be expressed. We are now gett ing numerous calls from businesspeople in this cit y of Winnip eg, and indeed in Brandon, aski ng, what are you guys doing? Why are we not hearing anything? When are you going to approach Ottawa?

Even businesspeople out of this city are suggest ing that, if you need us, we will come with you to make the case. It is the first time in many, many years that we have seen this strong an approach from a broad, broad sectoral base, that we have seldom ever seen before. I think they have seen the sin cerity of th is comm ittee, and how they work, how they conducted themselves and how they heard the issues.

So I would strongly suggest that the Premier head up the delegation to Ottawa to try and make, first of all, arrangements with the Prime Minis ter's office to meet wit h the Prime Minis ter as a group, and with the Minis ter of Fi nance, and indeed, with the Min ister of Agricult ure, and ask for that kin d of a hearing. We should, second ly, then determ ine exactly what we should be saying to them-whether it is a prepared document, by a resolution and/or other wise, that I think needs to be determ ined on this commit tee. The second approach should be that we would draft a long-term position.

We have many good people in the Department of Agricultur e that could draft a long-term position. It could be brought back to this committee. We could deter mi ne whether the essence of the paper would be such that we could all supp ort. We could then ask for an appearance before the Standing Committee on Agricu lture in Ottawa, and bring that Manitoba position for a long-term policy development to Ottawa and lay before Ottawa a Manit oba-made plan.

If we chose to, we could then-even before we do tha t-share that with other western provinces, and ask whether they would want to join in that kind of effort ag ain to bring to Ottawa that long-term plan-recognizing that the Prime Min ister has appointed a commit tee that will be tra vellin g western Canada. They will not be the Standing Commit tee on Agriculture. They have been a specially appointed commit tee that will hear agri cultur al concerns in western Canada. They will then bring back those concerns to Ottawa, I assume, maybe even to the Standing Commit tee on Agriculture. I do not know.

Ass umin g that process will also happen, we, I think, could be much, much closer to this whole process if we chose to do so again in a united fashion, such we have demonstrated until now. That is fundamental ly where we would li ke the proposal that we put before this commit tee as act ion that we thin k could be taken. We believe that this Premier of this province has a very key initia tive to play, and a very key role to play, and it should be done immedia tely. Mr. Derkach: I guess I would echo the sentiments of the member from Emer son, in terms of the urgency of this matter.

I hear the minis ter tal kin g about the federal Standing Commi t tee on Agricult ure perhaps moving through this province at the end of May. If we heard anything from the presenters, it was the matter of urgency in dealing with this issue. So I do not believe that we can wait for the stand in g commit tee to come to Manit oba or Saskatchewan, or wherever they may come, to take action on what we heard from the produc ers. I think the producers and the people who presented expect us to take action immedia tely.

As a matter of fact, if you were here at the end of the presentat ions last week, right at the very end of the presentations, there were some of the presenters who purposely waited till the very end of our discussions around this table to under stand more clearly what the process that we were going to be followin g was going to be. So I have to im press from my personal point of view, and also representing a lot of the western producers, who not only were hurt in 19 99, but have been hurt continuously since then, that this is not a matter that can wait for three weeks or a month. It is a matter that has to

May 7, 200 1 LEG IS LATI VE AS SE MBL Y OF MAN ITOBA 383 be dealt with now. So I have to encour age the min ister to take immed iate act ion. If we have to set aside some time in the House to deal with this matter, we need to do that. We did that before with agreement from the House Leaders that we would engage in an emergency debate. I think this is the second time that we have to address that issue and go before the House with this refined resolution, amended to reflect what we heard, and then to have, perhaps, a shorter debate on that.

But indeed, one that would lay out the path that is going to be pursued from this point on. My col league suggests that our work is done. As a committee, perhaps we have taken that most im portant step, and that was to hear from the producers. But I think the work is not fin ished. We have to now rely on the leadership of the Government of this province to take the next step, to be the people who init iate that new step. I think the min ister in di cated that she has already done that through communi cations with min isters in other provinces. But I think we have to raise that to another level.

I am suggest ing very strongly that the Premier become dir ectly in volved in contacting his counterparts in the other provinces, and that, indeed, an action plan be set down in terms of how we proceed from here. In terms of who we meet from Ottawa, that has to be thought through carefully, but I think the most im portant step has to be to meet with the Prime Mi nis ter. It is the Prime Min ister who has made remarks about the amount of support to agricul ture.

It is also the Prime Minis ter who very boldly stands up and awards in excess of $1 billion to the im provement of a waterf ront, and in excess of a half -billion dol lars to the arts community. I am not suggest ing that those projects should not proceed. What I am suggest ing is that you talk about the most essential thing we have in society, in our Jives, which is food. People who to il to produce that food cert ainl y deserve the same amount of recognition that perhaps some of these other projects do that have been recognized by the Prime Minis ter.

So, theref ore, I think it is incu mbent that the Prime Min ister him self takes an active role in addressing this issue. It is for that reason that I have to support the Member for Emerson (Mr . Jack Penner) in asking this province to take the leadership role in ensuring that we have an audience with the Prime Minis ter. Anything less is not acceptable to us, nor is it acceptable to the people of Manitoba.

At the same ti me, I think it is our responsibility, as legisla tors in Manitoba and Saskatchewan and Alberta and in Ontario and British Columbia, to meet with the members of Parliament in Ottawa who are sympathetic to our cause and who understand the gravity of this situation. But that can be done at a dif ferent level. I also believe that we have to ensure that the Standing Commit tee on Agricul ture in Ottawa afford an audience to the people from western Canada and, indeed, from Ontario to express the gravity of th is situation. I think we need to lay out a path.

So we need to think about process, we need to think about logistics. That is where, Madam Minis ter, your respo nsibility and the Pr emie r's lays. We cert ainly, I think, as a caucus-although I can only speak on behalf of myself, but, indeed, I think it has been echoed by our critic, the Member for Emer son (Mr . Jack Penner), in terms of what our position is. We cert ainly look forward. I think this is a time when we need to lay aside the pure raw politics and start looking at what we are going to do for the citiz ens of this prov ince. This is an issue that is not imp acting on the farm family alone.

It is im pacting on rural communities, whether they are the siz e of Dauphin, whether they are the size of Wink ler, or whether they are the siz e of Winnip eg. It is star ting to take its tol l. If you read the Brandon Sun on the weekend, if you li stened to the talk show in Brandon, you will understand that now the situ ation is becoming one that is of concern to the business people in towns and cities lik e Brandon. So, theref ore, I conclude only by suggest ing that we need to have some expediency to this. I do not th ink we need to take two to three weeks, or a week, to wordsmith the resolution or the draft.

I think that is a matter of hours and then we move on with it. So thank you, Mr. Chair. Hon. Steve Ashton (Min ister of Transportation and Government Services): Fir st of all, I wanted to in dica te that I did want to

384 LEGI SLATI VE AS SEM BLY OF MAN ITOBA May 7, 200 1 put some comments on the record. The reason I asked to take my name off the commi ttee tonight was because of another engagement. Because of the im portance of this, I actu ally asked the group I am meeting with if I could start the meeting later. Wi thout mentioning the group, I can te ll they were more than understand in g. I think that the message we received on the commit tee was a pretty strong one. It is real; there are real problems. I think it goes to the root of a lot of rural communities and the rural economy.

I do not think anybody cou ld help but be moved by the presenta tions that were particu larly given from the heart. I would cert ainly reflect some of the comments made by Mr. Penner a few mi nutes ago. I took the ti me, too, to talk to some of the presenter s as well, as I know other commit tee members did. It is real. There is just no doubt about it. The real question we have to decide tonight is twof old. One is what is our message, and the second is how are we going to get that message across.

I would li ke to spend ju st a couple of mi nutes on the message, because I really think that is the bigger picture here. I hope that if there are dis agreements on the tactics of how we get that message across, it will not lose sight of the bigger picture, which is the fact that every presenter I talked to wanted us to be non partisan. I think, by and large, and when I look around this table, it was not easy. There were a lot of people biting the ir tongues, I think, throughout some of the discussion on all sides. But that is what they want. I think they want that. thought there were some themes.

The min ister has mentioned a couple. I just want to add a few others that I think I would recommend we put into the resolution, because they are all issues. I want to start with one: the Crow rate. Now, I am not going to get in to the advisa bility or the lack thereof of the Crow rate. When you look at what happened to western Canada before the Crow rate and after the Crow rate, take out the two years' buy-out, it was about $800 milli on a year that used to go to western Canada that is not there anymore.

Now that, I think, is imp ortant. because if you are going to benchmark with the federal government any request for additional aid for agriculture, I think the argument should be: Used to be there, you took it away, and now it is time to put it back. This is western Canada; let us not forget here. If you remember the lobby in Ottawa in January, that was something about the whole country. There were farmers there from across the country. I happened to be there, by the way, meeting wit h the Min ister of Transportat ion .

I will get to that in a mi nute, because that is why I have some comment s on the tactics. * (1 9: 00) But start with the Crow rate. Start with a couple of other thi ngs. Fuel taxes. I mean, the excise tax is charged on farm use of fuel at the federal level. Now if you want to talk about imme diate ways the federal government, which has a $17 billion surplus, can help the farm economy, start with fuel tax. I would have mentioned the road tax. That did come up.

That is not a conflict of in terest in a technical sense, but when you are Mini ster of Transportat ion, 10 cents a li tre comes out of every lit re that is purcha sed in Mani toba, plus the GS T. The first money we are going to get back on the prov incial road system is going to be this year, first time sin ce 19 96. That is critical, too, because the reli ef on the farm fuel tax will help the farmers dir ectly. Putting money back on the road system will help some of the medium- to long-term issues that are out there, in terms of di versifi cation. Another theme, and this may be a li ttle more contr overs ial.

But I te ll you one thing, a lot of people focus this on the family farm and there was a lot of talk about corporat ization of agricul ture, agro indu stry and to a certain extent, some of this mig ht be reality. But a lot of people feel the pressure. What struck me is how, over the years, the definition of a family farm has been gett ing bigger and bigger and bigger. When I hear about people wit h farms in the range of thousands of acres talk about the corporate agenda, and how they were strug gling to keep a famil y farm, it shows you how far it has gone.

When you hear people talk about how there used to 30 famil ies in an area, and it is down to 5, that has got to be part of the message to Ottawa. I do not believe all of this is ir reversible. In the world of globalization, we sometimes tend to

May 7, 200 1 LEG IS LATIV E ASSEM BLY OF MAN IT OBA 385 think you lack control over thi ngs. I do not think that is the case, because that gets into the subsidy issue. Europe and the Americans have made a decision that they are going to slow this process down, and they are going to cordon off something called the famil y farm. It is real. I have seen it in Europe. I have seen it in the Unit ed States. So I do not think we should shy away from putting some of those thi ngs on the record, because I saw a lot of people there.

I do not mean this in a polit ical way, because we have dif ferent versions of how we view the world. But I will tell you; you cert ainl y could not te ll where people were coming from politically from the presenta tions. They all had the same basic analysis, and I think that is very im portant. The other one I want to put on, and that is di saster assistance, qu ite apart from agricul ture assistance, that came up, cer tai nly, in regards to the southwest. I think it is im portant.

We can get into, as we di d, and debate in the Legisla ture, and the Member for Ar thur- Vir den's resolution about whatever provincia l role there is. There is no doubt in my mi nd that there is a strong case to be made here that there could be more extensive OF AA coverage. I think that would be very usef ul because we heard a pretty strong message, both in Brandon and also here-a fair number of people came in from the southwest here-that you cannot ju st take the agri cultur al crisis where you have the di saster situation.

Those are ju st some of the immedia te thin gs that could be done, but I think the key one-1 get back to the Crow again-is we have to put in the resolution that this is not the West coming cap in hand here. This is the West saying: Look, we have adjusted to the lack of the Crow rate, but we really need the money that would have been there. That would have made a lot of dif ference. Whether it goes on roads or in farm aid or long term di versification, that is another issue.

Now, on the tact ics, since I have been min ister responsible for a number of areas that involved dealin g with the federal government on a regular basis. I have been down to Ottawa several times, more than I would care to go down to Ottawa, probably. I have done it on di saster assistance, so has the Member for Arthur- Vir den, so have other members here. I have done it on other issues. I will ju st give you one of the reasons why I think our bigger concerns should be to get the federal government to come here. I will give you an example.

One minis ter, and I do not mean this to continue any dispute here because I did get a meeting with the min ister. It is Art Eggleton, Min ister of Di saster Assis tance. By my count, we put in eight requests for a meeting. Now I will not comment on that, other than to say that I have had no difficu lty meeting with other minis ters-Ron Duhamel, Lloyd Axworthy before. I know the minis ter I met with was Lyle Vancli ef. I met with caucus members of all caucuses. Now, I met with him. It is nice to actual ly get a meeting.

But try to sit in the minis ter's office in Ottawa, and explain what is going on in southwest Mani toba when you have been there. I have been there. One thing I know: members of this committee who have much more dir ect exposure than I have. But there is nothing li ke gett ing that person out to see what is going on. The reality is, if you go back over a period of time in the southwest and compare it to, say, the Red Riv er, all the comparisons aside about dif ferent programmi ng and whatnot. One thing about the Red Riv er in '97, it got all sorts of atten tion and we had a visit. We had a sandbag thrown.

We had minis ters. You know, I really thin k the dif ference in the southwest is, I cannot think of a Cabinet min ister, a federal Cabinet minis ter, that has been in the southwest si nce-Souris, okay. Well, I did come in to Souris. I take that back. But, cert ainly, the Agricultur e Minis ter said, go talk to the Min ister of Dis aster Assi stance. I am not going to be overly critical agai n. I must admit I got a li ttle bit frustrated when he flew in, unannounced, to Shi lo, to look at the mil it ary base. It is not that far from Shilo across the way.

But I just want to put this there, that, you know, what is mi ssing with Ar t Eggleton, I think, is to get Ar t Eggleton to come to the southwest and look at it. I defy anybody to li sten to the presenter s here and not understand that at least there is a problem, and it is not being dealt with by fi nancial aid packages, because that is the

386 LEG IS LATI VE AS SE MBL Y OF MAN ITOBA May 7, 200 1 general response going back to when, you know, the Member for Morris was the min ister. I know it is good to talk about going down to Ottawa in the one sense, but first of all, I was down there in January. There was a farm rally from across the country. I think it had some imp �ct at that time. That was back in January. Mamtoba was well represented. I ran into a lot of farmers from Manit oba. I actually think the real focus should be in (

a) gett in g the message drafted, and (

b) gett ing the federal government here. If we are talking about urgency, it took us about a year to get a meeting with Art Eggleton. Assum ing that you can get a meeting in the fir st place is a big assumption, with Prime Minis ter or others. But even then, I think the urgency is for the Prime Minis ter on down to come out to southwest Manitoba-Manitoba generally, the west generally. I think that is how we are going t � get the mes sage across. I guess that is my v1ew of Confederat ion, in a lot of ways. I will just fin ish on this point.

It is easy, in frustr ation, to say we should get down to Ottawa one more time, and try that sort of approach. But what real ly has to happen is for Ottawa to come down here. I have a lot greater faith if we can get any of the federal MPs down here, any of the parties, gett ing them to understand what the problem is, than us going down there agai n. I would . urge commit tee members to perhaps focus m on the message fir st, because I think that is where we can get consensus.

On the second, even if there is some dis agreement on tactics, let us not forget here this is botto m-lin e coming down to making sure that (

a) the federal government realizes there is a problem, which we cer ta inly all do here in the province, and (

b) comes up with some short term as well as medium and long-term aid. 1 cannot stress enough the short term . I mentioned farm fuels. That was the fir st one th at came to mi nd. There are all sorts of thi ngs that can be done without even touching farm-aid programs, which is an im portant part of the short term. that could be done just on the tax side, the input costs side. The federal govern ment makes a lot of money off farming. I think it is about time, just to finish off, where we got people here and we explained a li ttle bit about Canadian hi story. I mentio ned the Crow _rate : I will end off on it.

That was part of the b1rthnght of Western Canada in join ing. Certai nly, in Saskatchewan and Alberta, if you go back to some of the original-the rai l li ne and the Crow rate. We sti ll have the rail li ne. We do not have the Crow rate any more. It is time to take �hat credit, that money that we have helped contnbute towards bringing that deficit down, and get some of it back. Seventeen billion dollars, I am sorry. We should see that back in Manitoba, and the way to get it is to get them here. Hon. Jon Gerrard (River Heights): Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

As I see it, we have had a lot of very helpful presentat ions, and I think the issues would break down into short-term issues that we need to proceed with, with urgency, and longer-term issues that we have the flexibility and the tim e to dig est a li tt le bit more and prepare a more lengthy report. In the short-term issues, I think that as many presenters have made the case, there is a need for an imm edia te cash inf usion of some sort from whatever level of government or governments, and that there are other components, some of which the Member for Thompson (Mr . Ashton) has alluded to.

The situation, particula rly in southwestern Manitoba, for example, in the wake of what happened in 19 99 and how it is cur rently affecting people there. * (19 :10 ) I think, in the nature and the urgency of the short-term concerns, we have heard very clearly from many that there is a crisis; that the words severe crisis have been used more than once· that the Association of Mani toba Mu nic ipalitie � put it this way: that this was the most serious public policy issue in the last 50 years. The Association of Manitoba Municip alities is not a body, which is given to hyperbole.

They are generally a body that consider s facts and cir cums tances carefully before they speak. So I think that on the short term, I agree with the Member for Thompson that we need to put together and decide what is our shor t-term message. But I agree, on other hand, with the member from Emerson. that I think that the most

May 7, 200 1 LEG ISLA TIV E AS SE MBLY OF MAN ITOBA 387 effective way that we can present that short-term message is by going with the Premier at the head of a delegation from Manit oba. If we can persuade the other provinces to go as well, that would be wonderf ul. If not, I think this commit tee should go with the Premier as the head of the delegation, and with representat ives from the business communit y, the farm commu nity, and perhaps the Association of Manitoba Municip alities. I think to do anything less at this point, would be to not take seriously enough the concerns that we have heard.

I think that if we go with that sort of a delegation, it will have an im pact and it will be li stened to. I thin k that we need to do some homework, and we need to put together a proposal for the short term, wh ich reflects what we have heard, what the need is. If we are talking dollars on the table, as I think a huge proport ion of those who presented suggested, that to go and ask for simply another $500 milli on from Ottawa, given exactly the same way as was the last $500 milli on, is not prec isely what I heard from most people.

The way that that $500 milli on was di vided up-when you looked at it on an acreage basis and on the basis of what was the grain and oils eeds production, as opposed to all agricultural production, Manit oba comes out less well than Manit oba should. We have to have a message, a concept, an approach, which makes sense and which we can argue persuas ively. We may need to spend a li ttle bit of time -we need to do this qu ick ly-but a li ttle bit of time putting together the mat erial to make that case, and to make it really well, because I think we will only succeed if we go down with a very strong case.

We have a lot of material on the crisis, but I think we need a strong case in terms of what we are proposing. I think it is im portant that the role of this commit tee-we talked about, to study and make recommendations in terms of both federal and prov incia l support, I would presume. In order to make the case in Ottawa, we have to make the case in terms of what is being done, and what could be done provin cially, in supporting the agricultural community in partner ship with the federal government. So I would suggest there are some key critic al thi ngs that we have to do.

One is, as we are already debating, what is the process. I think we can div ide that up conveniently into a shorter term and a longer term. In the longer term. I think it is an effective approach to present to the House of Commons commit tee when it comes here, or to other minis ters or even the Prime Minis ter coming to visit this province, but in the short term, I think we have to act. In the short term, we need to put together and decide what that message is. We have to make the case factual ly, as well as eloquently. In the long term, we have to have a coherent plan for agri culture in Manit oba.

That clearly is what this commit tee was charged with doing with the resolutions, lookin g at the long er-term vision and plan for agriculture and for rural communities. We heard a tremendous amount of material, suggest ions, ideas. I think there is a wealth of resource that we can use to make that case. The urgency of the short-term case leads me to belie ve, and belie ve strongly, tha t we need to act and act quic kly, but we have to put precisely, concisely, that case and make it well.

I think that we should go to Ottawa with the short-term case. and then we have a bit more time to make the longer-term case and to present it in various formats, inclu di ng to the Standing Commit tee on Agri culture when it is here. Hon. Scott Smith (Mini ster of Consumer and Corporate Affairs): Just to reflect on a few of the comments that have been made, I think we all agree, and there is no dis pute around the table, that what we heard from the presenters in every district that we were in throughout the entire province is the severity of the situation we are faced with and what we are dealing with.

I think the effective strategy is what we are trying to develop. We have worked well as an entire committee, and I belie ve we want to achieve the same goal at the end. It is the strategy in the process that we use to get there that I believe we have a li ttle bit of dif ference on. When we heard from presenters throughout the entire prov in ce, we heard star ting back a number of years. You can pick a year, whether it is five or six or seven or eight years ago; this problem did not happen overnight.

Some of the im pacts and the severity cert ainly were created through the di sastrous flooding that we had in the southwest area. That alone is another

388 LEGI SLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MA NIT OBA May 7, 200 1 situa tion. We saw presenter after presenter. One that stands to mi nd was the young lady from Scotland, and being over here for the number of years that she was, and the amount of dol lars and capital that was lost out of her particular situ ation. We heard that over and over agai n. We heard not only from the indi vid ual producers, but as the member mentions, the Association of Manitoba Municip alities that came with a well-done presentat ion.

We have heard previous to this on treks to Ottawa from SARM, which si ngs basical ly the same message that AMM is putt in g forth to us. We have taken it to a level thr ough those. We have been to Ottawa a number of times. Saskatchewan has done the same. The Federat ion of Canadian Municip alities has been invol ved at a national level, whic h, I belie ve, needs to be a part of this solution as well. I believe that SARM needs to be part of this solution and it needs to be im mediate. How we contact them and get them to deliver the message with us jointly is what the question is.

I have seen tr yin g to get a meeting. I have seen both the folks across the table here in opposition, as well as our Government , trying to get an urgent meeting with federal represen tatives. An overnight meeting with whoever you want is not going to happen. I thin k we are all realists. Whoever we pick to say we are going to do this next week, there is no guarantee that we are going to get a meeting with the people with whom we would li ke to meet.

Cert ainly, I think and I beli eve that the most strategic group of people that we can deliver this message to, which is going to have instant imp act on, is going to be the federal Ag Standing Commit tee. I believe that that is a li nk, a dir ect lin k, with senior levels of the federal government. I beli eve it is a lin k with the Prime Minis ter. * (19 :20) We talk about short-term dollars. Now, when the Crow, and we all heard this and we all know this, was lost was when some massive problems started to happen. We all know that and the federal government knows that.

It is the matter of how we del iver that message. The indiv idual producers and the farm organizations said that over and over again. The member from Thompson identifies the short-term solutions. Some dollars into the pro ducers' pockets is what we need, and we need it right away. The federal excise tax is something that can be done very soon. We can also look at gett ing people to the source. I believe that going to Ottawa with a group of people-we can all pick people that would be very, very effective. We know people that would be eff ective. This commi ttee would be effective.

We know from what we heard and the inf ormation that we gather ed th roughout this process, we all have the inf ormation. We know the severity of it. We have not only sat through the commit tee meetings that we have sat th rough here, we have all sat through it within the di stricts we come from, and we know the situation. But I believe, that li ke a Jot of the producers and a lot of the people that met with us, they are asking for an im media te solution.

They are ask ing for someone to pay some att ention, someone to realize at a senior level, at the federal level, the severity of the problem that we have here. They are as tir ed of going hat in hand and with a tin cup banging on the in side perim eter of Ottawa, as we all are. We speak of the dif ferent people, and everybody has mentioned, I noticed here tonight, dif ferent people that can put the message across, and groups and organizations that can be effective.

I cannot think of any more effective way than having the federal organization, the federal Ag Stand ing Committee, come into Manit oba with the Premier, and this commit tee and everybody identif yin g to them the problems that we have heard over and over and over again with all the committees that we have spoken about.

We spoke about the local Chamber of Commerce and the Manit oba Chambers of Commerce, the farm groups and the Keystone Agricult ural Producers, a massive rally when we get the people down here to identif y the problem and the possibility, and I will throw this out, of act ually identif yin g and having people put on, in stead of a sandbag and a photo opportu nity, a pair of boots and heading out to the source and to the reali ty, not only on the farmgates and the

May 7, 200 1 LEG IS LATIV E AS SEMBLY OF MAN ITOBA 389 producers, but maybe to Souris, where 13 businesses have closed down, and to a lot of the other areas that you can identif y with business and stra tegic plans here from the members of the business community. I cannot think of a more eff ective way. So to take a commit tee and try to establi sh a meeting, and try to est ablish that qui ckly, is a large task to ask. To get an audience with the people we would li ke to get an audience with, would be very di fficult. I belie ve bringing people to the source would be the best process.

It would be the best strategy that we could follow together in doing it. I believe that that is the most effective way to go. I do not belie ve that going to Ottawa again-obviously, the min ister has tried to contact the other Ag min isters to get them to join on board with us. They feel going to Ottawa again would not be as fruitf ul as in previous attempts. I believe the issue is to get our point across.

It is imp erative that they know how urgent this message needs to be and to bring people to the source, as opposed to drivin g inside the Perim eter and sitting in an office that is qui te comfortable for the members in there. However, I believe that if we can get the local members here ralli ed up, our M. P.s, cert ain ly, from the Ontario border west, to start doing their job for the constituents that they have been elected to and bring some of their counte rparts out here to the sources, it would be the best strategy to use. Mr. Glen Cumm ings (Ste.

Rose): I would echo what I have heard around the table here that we all have an appreciation and a much better understa nding of the problem tha t the grai n and oils eed sector is facin g in rural Manit oba, and in fact, western Canada. I do not want us to get derailed, at least in my mi nd, from the urgency and the pointed hand. Certai nly, we heard a full range of presen tations from the fact that we need help today to people who are suggesting long-term pot ential solutions, and that is good and usef ul.

But, there are a large number of people out there who are depending on us to represent the urgency of this problem, and to make that point as qui ckly and as hard as we can with those who are in decision-making positions. The member from Thompson and the member from Brandon both made good points that are not points I want to argue with. but I would vary slightly in the approach that they make.

Obviously, it seems to me that as a reference point, the fact that the amount of money that annually went into this part of the country in the days of the freight rate assistance, is a valid reference point, but I do not thin k that going beyond that-we cannot mir e ourselves in the debate about whether or not the Crow rate should be restored. We need to remind ourselves that one of the real base causes here is that there is a world price war on, on the products that we are tr ying to export into the world market.

There are a number of ways of dealing with that beyond whether or not we should have freight rate assistance, and I suspect that what we would run into, is that it is entirely possible that producers in Alberta would not support that approach and it would undermin e the position that we want to make very saliently with Ottawa. What my colleagues are sayin g and what I endorse wholehearted ly is that, as in any government, I would suggest tha t the Prime Min ister has a sig nific ant say in the dir ection that his government is going to go and whatever reaction his min isters may choose to take.

I know the dif fi culty that this puts the minis ter and our Premier in, but I do not think it should be di smis sed as a point that we should take the opportunity to make as str ongly as we possibly can. We are qu ite prepared to stand behind our Premier and the other premie rs of western Canada if they can join tly request a meeting with the Prime Minis ter.

I know that all of the other arguments that are being made here are good arguments and may we ll be where we will be forced to end up, but if we do not try to get the Prime Minis ter's attention-he is, after all, the Prime Minis ter for all regions of this country. He made that argument in the House of Commons not that long ago on another topic. If he truly meant what he was saying, then he needs to, regardless of the elected members he has in this part of the country, take a serious look at what is happening here. He ju st made announcements in the range for the arts indu stries, as my colleague pointed

390 LEG ISLATIV E AS SEM BLY OF MANIT OBA May 7, 200 1 out, in the range of the same numbers of dol lars that we are looking for, that our constituents are looking for. It is not overnight that the grain and oils eed sector has found themselves in the positio n of needing assistance. This has been growing and growing, exacerbated by weather conditions in a couple of cases, but this was not unforeseen in terms of the depress ion of the world's grain markets.

If the three premiers could see the ir way clear to unit e with a message to Ottawa, surely the Prime Min ister would be in a very difficult position to reject that call.

I cert ainly think that if tha t opportunity was made avai lable to the Prime Min ister and he chose not to hear the pleas of the leaders of at least three, or possibly four, of the largest land mass provinces of this country, tha t he is leaving himself very vul nerable to being a central only government, and I do not think any government would lik e to be branded in that respect. * (1 9:30) So I would urge this commit tee not to dism iss what the min ister has suggested, but to crank it up one notch.

Let us see if the key decision makers in this country, the ones that I have mentioned, could get together and get the attention of the Prime Mi nis ter, who, undoubtedly, will , if he agrees to a meeting, be in a position to provide some ind ication to the people who are not fill ing their fuel tanks this week because they do not have an operating li ne of credit, who are in some cases, as we were told at the hearings, the last meeting we had here at this very table-some people are, frankly, not even cleaning seed at th is point. They have not rented the land.

They have not made arrangements to seed, although they may we ll have it in their min ds what they want to do. There is going to be some last mi nute decisions which will compound what we already see happening. I will close my remarks by only adding a couple more thi ngs, Mr. Chairman.

One is that, in dis cussion with very signi ficant businesses in the area that I represent-and we have a lot of diversif ied catt le business in my riding; I also talked to a lot of people who liv e and depend more on the grain and oils eeds business-the one thing that ju st about blew me away is that businesses that are seen outward ly to be very competent, very successf ul, and probably will weather the storm in the long run, are tel lin g me that their business has been cut to three-qua rters and to half the gross business that they are doing.

That will soon start to back up, ladies and gent lemen, into the factories and into our larger centres. It is already evident, and I think it will become incr easin gly evident, even right here in Winnip eg. So I encou rage the com mi t tee to continue with our non-partisan approach to this, but I would enco urage us also to crank it up one more notch to the level that I am suggest ing. If that fail s, the people on the farmland out there will know at least that we set our targets high and we will take it from there. Ms.

Wowch uk: I have lis tened to everybody and I was thinkin g about having heard from some 85 presenters and many written submis sions. Those people that presented to us affected all of us very dramatically when we heard about the kin ds of stories they told. We are never going to create that same sense of urgency if we go to Ottawa. What we need is for that federal commit tee to come here. We need those federal representat ives to realiz e that they represent western Canada and that there is a very serious situation here.

That is why I feel so strongly that we have to have the commit tee come here, if they would come. If we could have some people present to them, but have them visit some of the people and have them understand what the real im pact of these changes are and these high input costs that producers are facin g Just as we had a human face put on the issue for us, we need for the federal representat ives to have that human face put on for th em. The co-chair of the stand ing commit tee is in terested in com ing here. I talked to the chair of the committee. He said he was going to be tak ing it to the committee.

I have not had a response from them, but I feel very strongly that they need to see fir st-hand how serious the sit uation is. With respect to the premi ers, I agree that the premiers have to be involv ed in this. The west ern premiers are meeting within the next couple

May 7, 200 1 LEG IS LATIV E AS SE MBLY OF MAN IT OBA 391 of weeks. This item is on th eir agenda, and I think that is the forum for dis cussion with the premiers. There has been dis cussion amongst them. There have been letters written to the Prime Min ister. Maybe from the Western Premiers' Conf erence we can get a strong message from the West that can then go to the Prime Minis ter. I think that is one of the steps that has to be done. I think we now have to look at what we can do. There is a draft

summary here of what was presented at the stand ing commit tee, and I have also suggested that we would want to make some changes and come back to the commit tee with recommendations on wor din g to those changes. I said Monday, but if this Wednesday works for people-that is in two days' time-1 would be qu ite happy to suggest that the committee sit on Wed nesday agai n. By that time, there would be some draft amendments drawn to the resolutions.

We could have the dis cussion on them and then move forward with that to be able to present the resolution back to the House and then have further dis cussion from there. think that we have sympathy to our position to having the stand ing commit tee coming here, from the co-chair of the committee. Alberta and Saskatchewan are saying that they are supportive of the stand ing commit tee. We do not have support of the other provinces going to Ottawa right now, and I think that for Manit oba to go alone, is not going to have nearly the strength.

When I think about Manitoba and Saskatchewan stand ing alone wit hout the suppor ts of other provin ces when we were in our last lobby for funds, that was diff icult . To have one province going alone, to me, is ju st not going to carry nearly the strength as having three provinces in vite the stand ing commit tee here, make presentations, and also have th is di scussed at the Western Premi ers' Conference, and then move it forward from there. So I would suggest that we think about tha t and see if we could come back with amendments to the resolution and have further discu ssion.

I did say Monday earlier, and that was an error on my part. We could be doing it as early-and I would be suggesting Wednesday evening. Mr. Larry Maguire (Arthur -Virden): I thank the min ister for her comments, and I thank the commit tee for putting the report together that they have, and the draft. It very succinctly points out what we heard throughout the time, just the logistics of it at least, and the hearings that we had.

I guess I want to say what I said at 2:30 in the morning after the final presentat ions -the fi nal commit tee meeting was held here in this very room last Tuesday night -that if there is one thing we heard from the people who are presenting out there today, there are two issues here, very strongly, that they felt needed to be dealt with. One was the immed iate cash inf usion, let us call it short-term suppor t, but that is what they were calli ng for, more money.

That does not always fix the problem, and in this case, it will not save some of those who are already on their way out this spring, but it may be able to allow them to have a more digni fied dis persion from the ind ustry if that is the softest thing we can say about it, or the most compassiona te thin g that can be said for it. The second one was, of course, the longer term support that is needed in the ind ustry and a revampin g, if you will, of the AID A program and the kin d of long -term stuf f. I think the min ister knows full well, and agrees. I do not say that sarcast ically.

The members opposite and the Government today here in Manit oba, I think you all understand that and belie ve that, that those are the two issues and those are what are needed. I commend the Member for Thompson (Mr. Ashton) for bringing up the issue of western Manitoba and the flood there, because as the Member for Brandon will know-he has talked to businesspeople there, Brandon West, as I did this morning and on a number of occasions. They indi cated to me the severity, and we indica ted to Mr.

Eggleton, when we were there a year ago in Ottawa, that it wou ld take a year for that imp act to hit and that we would be back. I was there with farmers at the end of February for that specific issue, not for this imme dia te cash inf usion and not for the long-term program, but for suppor t for that di saster, but I will not go there. I agree we need to deal with that and I would support the Government, of course, if we can get some funding for that particular region out of this effort as well. I think that the message that we heard from these people was the urgency of what we need to deal with today.

392 LEGI SLA TIVE ASSEMBLY OF MAN ITOBA May 7, 200 1 * (1 9:40) I guess in normal cir cums tances, I would probably say, well, it would be a great thin g to get the commit tee to come out here to the Prairies and talk to us, a good thing to come to Mani toba to hear what we have heard already, but we would be present ing it to them again as a uni fied group. We have a unanimous resolution before us again tonight that I do not think needs a whole lot of work. I think there was a good deal of work put into it. The Liberal Leader here, as we ll, in Manitoba put into that as well as all

part ies here. I appreciate the fact that we are able to come to a consensus and put that kin d of an effort on the table. I think the fact tha t we did, shows that we knew what the problem was in the indu stry, because the people that came in , talked about the need for at least a $500-milli on new program, immedia te cash fundin g. They talked about the need for a long-term fix in this process. We had some presentations that actually talked about the value-added that was needed in this ind ustry as well.

The min ister of hig hways from Thompson, Emergency Measures Organiz ation of Manit oba, indi cated in his opening remarks today that we go back and look at the Crow rate. I have said many times in this House that that was the beginning of some of the problems that we have seen in Western Canada, particula rly, I have always said, in western Manit oba. When I lobbied to get it changed, it was always to have a buyout, but we will not go in to that around this table today. I am not here to debate that with the members today at all, as the minis ter, qu ite rightf ully, in his remarks stated.

We are here to elaborate on the consensus that we can fin d. I would only say that when he said, put it back, I know that the min ister does not mean in its old form in regard to-yes, put the money back-and I would agree with him on that. It is not a matter of whether the federal government has the money or not. They have a large surplus, and even if they did not, all we are really asking for here in any of these kinds of programs, regardless of the size of them, would be the in terest that they have already saved in six years of not paying that Crow sup port into western Canada.

They have already made the major saving that it was put into place to do. It was put there to reduce the debt of this countr y, to reduce the deficit to get out of a deficit position purely and openly. I remember the federal minis ter responsible at the time. I was in the room as a farm leader, making those comments that we are going to do this. He was the last one on earth that ever would have wanted to change it personally, but his government gave him the dir ection to do so. Those dollars are there, and I think we can find commitment to do that.

I am not going to try and develop the package that we need to do, because I think the resolution does deal with that. But I think that the urgency of the issue is the thing we heard. The only comment I will make is that it is all well and fin e to say that we are going to have the commit tee come here to Manitoba to meet with us. I would concur with what has been said around the table-and the minis ter, I commend her for her efforts in trying to get the other provinces, leaders, premier s, min ister s, and Ag min isters together to be on side. would extend it to B.C. as well, if we could, to try and make it four.

Unless we are going to go in the next I 0 days, it may be a dif ferent premier there. We will let that one fall out. Cert ain ly, they are not going to come while they are in volved in an election. But it does im pact B.C. very heavily, this issue. So I think that whoever the new government is, whether there is a ch ange or not, it would be incu mbent upon us to ask them to come, at least in this kin d of a package, if that is what we are going to do.

I applaud the members for their concern. but having been around that federal table, of course, the only one here, I think, with probably more experience at going to meetings in the House of Commons Ag Committee besides the member from River Heights, who maybe did not spend that many times around the com mit tee, but was in the Government, and my honourable colleague from Emerson, as a farm leader mak in g presentat ions to that commit tee, are not the ones we need to target here. I think the min ister from hi ghways would agree from the meetings that he has had in

May 7, 200 1 LEGI SLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MAN ITOBA 393 Ottawa that he has had some compassion from the federal Liberal members for both the city of Winnip eg here and Manitoba and Southern On tario. I have. I know the minis ter has. But it did not carry the day. It did not carry the day with the Min ister of Agricul ture at the time that it was needed to get the dollars on the table. I would put on the table that the only person, or group of people, that is going to make the change for what we need is the Prime Min ister him self. The Fin ance Minis ter and the Agricult ure Min ister would be peripheral to that.

If we can get them into the room and all have a meeting with them at once, it would be great. But ju st from the experience that I have had. you will get concu rrence for our effort from the House of Commons Agricul tural Commit tee, whether we meet them there, or whether we convince them to come here. My only concern with having them come here is the time it would take to get them to agree to come here, number one.

When I think if this is the matter of most urgent public-and I do not know what your MUPI stand for- but if they ever had a matter of most urgent public need, this is probably it, in the agricul ture community at least. There are others. But this one, I say sympath etically, that it would be fine logistics-wise and optics-wise to say that we would li ke to have the House of Commons Ag Commit tee come, and they may come. But it probably, as the minis ters indi cated, would not be until la ter in May or June, if we were to get them here then.

Even if they came tomorrow, they are not the ones we need to target the message to. I guess the Prime Minis ter is the bott leneck. We have seen that in hi s own party. The Ag Commit tee, federally, did come out to the Prairies and did have a series of hearings in the prairies in the fall of 19 98, and they came out with an AID A program. They heard some sympathy for the im pacted li vestock ind ustry at that time, the hog ind ustry in particula r, and there was some response, but we have heard many, many presentations on what the AID A program did for us, and everybody asked for it to be changed.

So I thin k that has to be part of our long term vision. But if we are going to help those farmers that need it yester day-if it had not been rammg right now, there is not a farmer in Manit oba, hardly, that would not be out in the fi eld trying to seed today. That is the urgency of this situation. So I would beseech the members of this committee, on all sides, to put a plan together to try to involve our Premier. I would concur with my co lleagues who have said that we would back our Premier in trying to get that meet ing wit h the Prime Min ister one more time.

I know you were successf ul in gett ing the one before-he and Mr. Romanow. We may dif fer on the results of that particular meeting at that time, but we are going in this time with an all-party resolution, or we could hopef ully develop the resolution that we have to asking for what is needed. Three weeks have already gone by since we began this process, and in poli tic al movement circles, that is very qu ick, I agree.

But to the average person out there in the country who is saying, why did we not do this last fall, or I cannot fin d the dollars to meet the incr eased fertil izer needs-the minis ter knows well what has happened to the in creased costs of fue l, so I will not go into that. But that is the urgency that is needed out there today. I think what the members on our side, at least what I hear my colleagues saying, is that we would be in concert to go and back the minis ter and her Premier to go to Ottawa and try to find concur rence with the other minis ters.

We may not be able to make a big enough wave in the ocean if we go it ourselves. But if the min ister's indic ation to us is that the other premiers and the other Ag minis ters are looking at this, perhaps there is a way that we could get some response from them by Wednesday, to let them know the urgency of this. Their farmers are going to the fi elds due to the complia nce of th is committee, and I thank them for it. I was able to drive from Calgary to Lethbridge for my daughter's graduation a week ago Frida y, and vir tually all the land in Southern Alberta is seeded.

It is so darn dry out there that there is an urgency there as well. They carne up with $1 0.26 an acre for the farmers in Alberta. I do not think it would sti ll be below the Alberta government to want to come and get the federal government to

part ici pate in a bigger share of

394 LEGI SLA TIV E ASSEMBLY OF MANIT OBA May 7, 200 1 that, or in some other program in redesigning one. So I will just leave it before we get into what we could do. I ju st wanted to lay out some of my-if I have any experience in this in dustry and anything I can offer this commit tee, it is the fact of knowing a li ttle bit about how that Ag Commit tee works in Ottawa. I think we can predict what the react ion would be. Even as I say, if they came tomorrow they are not the ones that we have to convince about gett ing immed iate inf usion. We can work with them, though of course, I think, on a long-term program.

So I guess I see it as having two dif ferent issues that maybe we can deal with on this.

I think the one that the farmers want us to deal with most urgently is the imm edia te cash inf usion, and draw the examples of parity that many people talked about in presentat ions to us with gett ing kin d of some level of reference to the Amer ican farm programs. * (1 9:50) I would only urge one final time tha t the commit tee look at keeping the message to getting the other premiers onside, the other Ag commit tees, and even extend it to the municip al groups and other provinces as we have offered our own here, as well as farm leaders and business people.

I only say that because if you have four provinces, four premi ers, four Ag minis ters, four groups of business leaders, four municip al groups, a bunch of the farm groups going -even if they only have one representat ive each in some of those business groups and otherwis e-to Ottawa, that kin d of public acknowledgement that we are will ing to meet with the Prime Minis ter at any ti me, or at very short notice, should get some national attent ion, and puts him in a spot where, I think , you know, without putting him in a comer, it shows the urgency of the sit uation, and then it is up to him to make a decision.

Thank you. Mr. Frank Pitura (Mor ris): Mr. Chai rperson, I was sitting here li st enin g to all of the discussion that has taken place, and I was trying to frame in my own mi nd what I would say when given the opportunity. So I tried to put myself in the position of the group of people that stood out there and made the presenta tions to us, and pretended that they were stand ing there li stening to us talk tonight.

I know that most of them that stood up there at the podiu m compli mented us and congrat ulated us on being an all-party commit tee of this House and that we would jointly address the situation of additional farm aid in the shor t term and a long-term safety net for the future. The questions I guess they asked us most often, not dir ectly, but cer ta in ly by in nuendo in their presenta tion, were that we hope you can give us all the help that you can.

Yet, when I am li st enin g to the presentations here tonight, I see that there is help being put forward, but it is being put forward with two definite dif ferent paths. I guess I said, well, what would they say?

I think that if they were to make a recommendation to us here tonight and say that if we really were in terested in helpin g them all we can, that, sure, there is a great idea on that side of the table about invitin g the standing commit tee to come out here, in vitin g the Min ister of Agricultu re to come out here, invitin g the Prime Minis ter to come out here and have a look and talk to people out here.

They would also say that there is also a great idea on this side of the table of trave llin g to Ottawa and asking for a meeting with the Prime Minis ter and asking for a meeting wit h the Standing Commit tee on Agricultu re in Ottawa and meeting with the Li beral M. P.s in Ottawa to tell them the story. They would say, I thi nk, Mr. Chai rperson, why do you not do both? It is not out of the realm of possibility. You indica ted to us at the commit tee when we were producers stand ing out there that you would not leave a stone untumed to help us. Then let us do it.

So I ask the co mmit tee to consider both of these options, because if we do it and fail, then we can say we tried, but if we only do half, I do not know what we can say to those producers. Thank you. Mr. Penner: Fir st of all, I am encour aged by what I hear around the table. I heard the Min ister of Transportat ion enuncia te his concern about what had been done during the debate of the Crow, and the decision the Government had made to remove almost $800 milli on annually

May 7, 200 1 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MAN ITOBA 395 from western Canadian, not all Canadian, but western Canadian agri cul ture, and his concern in regards to that. I heard the min ister, at the same time, talk about the need to remove taxes off farm input costs. That encou raged me extrem ely, because that gave me a clear in dic ation that this cur rent Manitoba admin is tra tion is looking at removing further taxes from farm input costs, such as building costs and others. That is a possibilit y to encourage for the di versifica tion, and that of course, has been requested by the farm community.

I was encour aged to hear presenters, on both sides of the House, in dic ate the ir desire and will ingness to engage the Stand ing Commit tee on Agricul ture, and that we would encour age them to come down here and have a li sten. I also heard di scussion about the huge in creases in cost that farmers were incur ring. I heard from some producers this last week, when they had received their cash advances, had taken it to the bank and the banker had sa id: Thank you, we are going to apply that against last year's expendit ures to pay down your debt of last year's input costs.

That leaves them with a negative for this year's input and draws on the next year's income. In other words, spend next year's income to pay your last year's cost, whic h leaves them with nothing for this year, wit h no li ne of cred it. Therein li es my concern. We are expecting a group in our society, first of all, to spend a large amount of money to buy themselves a job. That is really what farmers do, and then we te ll the ir spouses that that is not good enough.

Even if you inv est half a milli on or a milli on dollars to buy yourself a job, and take 10 or 12 or 20 years to pay that off in order for you to be able to try and provide a li vin g for your famil y, and when that fail s, your spouse has to go to work and find a job outside of the farm to help you support your famil y, put your famil y through school, and ind eed help put in the crop. Then, when that fail s, we have the audacity to talk about delaying further action, delaying action that we, I think, should take immedi ately. Our Premier (Mr .

Doer) should imme di ately get on the phone as soon as this commit tee ends its hearing, and tomorrow morni ng, the first order on his business should be to call the Prime Minis ter's office and say: Our commit tee has concl uded its hearings and this is what we have heard. We have heard that there was a shortf all in cash income this year ranging in the realm of what the Department of Agricul ture has laid out, and what the shortf all is between cost of production and the actual incomes. That range is between $20 and $70 an acre.

Most farmers, that we heard come before this commit tee, said that we should be asking for between $40 and $60 an acre, if it were, in fact, an acreage payment. Nobody said it should be based on acres. In my view, I do not think I heard that, although some encour age that. But they were not that firm. But that is, rough ly, what the cost would be to the general treasury. I think that conforms to what the Department of Agricul ture has put out, in fact, as to what the losses had been this last year.

That does not incl ude, Madam Minis ter, the in creases in fuel prices, in fert iliz er prices, in seed prices and everything else that farmers have to buy before the crop can be taken off. Yet we have a rec ommendation before us that says that we should wait for another tour of Manit oba by yet another commit tee. * (20:00) We have everythin g that has been said, a hundr ed or better presentat ions made by a hundred or more people in this province that te ll us vir tu ally the same story. The story is there is a severe cash crunch, and it needs immed iate att ention.

We cannot delay the action, because many of those farmers that appeared before us are not going to go out to the field. They are not going to go. There were tractors parked in my community this last week that should have been rollin g because the land was in a condition to be planted. Yet they were not planted. I honestly did not have the nerve to drive in to the yards and ask, why are you not seeding, because I think I know the answer. Because the banker told them why they are not seeding. So there are some other options that we could address.

That is we have an agricultur e credit corporat ion in this province that could be util ized to extend further credit to farmers to put a crop in. That is an immed iate action that could be taken to give them that assurance that while we are li stening to yet another federal commit tee, and while we are waiting for tha t commit tee

396 LE GI SLATI VE ASSEMBLY OF MAN ITOBA May 7, 200 1 to tour this provin ce, and while we are waiting for their results, and while we are waiting for them to meet with their Prime Min ister, there is something we could do. We could extend that MACC loan guarantee to the banks, and say to the banks: You will get your money back. Those are all thin gs we could do, yet they are not within the purview of this committee. We can only recommend, or we can make many other recommendations if we chose to; yet they would only be recommendations. It is the Premier (Mr.

Doer) and the minis ter and the Cabinet and the Treasury Board that must make those kinds of decisions, and they have the latitude to do that. Yet, we choose not to as a joint commit tee , and I respect that, to do those kin ds of thin gs. We choose to dir ect the att ention to where the general public that appeared before us thought we should dir ect our at tention. That is, in large part, the federal government's responsibility, because these are trade actions we are facing, and they are based on very fundamental decisions. The Europeans have decide d that they will keep 9 mil li on people in rural Europe.

That is cheaper than putting them in cities. So they made that decision. The Amer icans have said 50 percent of our food costs will be borne by the taxpayer, not across the food counter. So now the farmer receives 50 percent of the ir in come dir ectly from Uncle Sam. Are we going to allow our farmers to be cut loose in that same economic environment? I think not. 1 do not think we can afford it. Many people have said, well, we will just let our farm community go. Well, we met last week with four execu tive � embers, CEOs of four grain compani es stt uated right in Winnip eg.

That is where they have their head off ice. I am not encour aged by what I heard. They would love to stay here and they would love to do business here, but if they see the decl ine in production based on the decisions that governments have made so far, there is, I think, a real serious thr eat to that industry. There is no question there is a real serious threat, because if half of our producers are not going to put a crop in, then that means that, at the optimum, there can only be half a crop. That means there will only be half the handle. That means there will be only be room for half the indu stry.

I mean, that is pure common sense. So let us look at the realit y of the si tuation and the urgency of it before we make decisions at this committee. I urge all of you commit tee members, even thos e of you who reside in the city of Winnip eg, you have far more to lose than we in the rural areas do, because you will lose your in dustries. Without question you will. Buhler Industries is an indic ation of what happens when the farm community has money to buy. We can blame it on unions; we can blame it on new ownersh ip at Buhler; but the reality is that there is not money to buy new tractors.

There is not enough work for the amount of tractors that are currently requir ed, and theref ore, there are no jobs. That is the problem. Look at some of the other in dustries that you are seeing go down in this province as we speak ? cloth in� indu stry. We say, well, a clothin � mdustry ts really not affected by farmers, is it? Two hundred and forty jobs went down this week in the clothing indu stry in this city, and in my town of Alt ona, fif ty jobs. They ju st turned the lock on the door. Well, when there is not money to buy, then there is also nothing to sell.

You know, it reminds me a bit of the trip 1 took to Ukraine. They said, when we were all under Communism we all had money, but there was nothing that we could buy, because there was nothing in the stores. When we came out of Communism, the stores were full. We could buy everyth ing. They said, we loved it, but we have no money to buy. That is where we are fast approachin g rural Manitoba. There is not money to buy. We are now using cash advances on next year's crop to pay for last year's inp uts. I know for some of you, it is almost unim aginable that that could happen, but it is.

So I say to you, Madam Min ister, waiting for another committ ee to do another tour in this province and waiting for them to approach their Prime Min ister, and waiting for them then to make the decision, in my view, is not an option for most of the people who appeared before this committee. That is not an option. What we need to do is that your Prem ier (Mr. Doer) and my Premier need to join hands, and you and I need to stand beside him when he joins his hands. We need to encourage him to make the call to the Prime Min ister and beg him

May 7, 200 1 LEG IS LA TIYE ASSEMBLY OF MAN ITOBA 39 7 to open his door to us, and before the week is over, we should be in Ottawa making the case, because that is how urgent it is. It cannot wait any longer. We have waited far too long in this process. This commit tee should have met at the beginnin g of this last week to make the decision that we need to make tonight. We should not wait again till next Wednesday. We should make the decision tonight about what we are going to say. Madam Minis ter, this message is very simple to Ottawa.

Manit oba farmers need a major cash injection in order for them to be able to ju st survive till this fall, to put a crop in the ground and take it off, ju st for them to be able to take another chance at the roulette wheel of for tune in agri cult ure. So I say to you, Madam Min ister, take a long, hard look at what you are really facing, and the pictur e is not pretty. The alternative is not pretty. So I enco urage you, and I encourage all members of this commit tee, to make the decision tonight to draft a position that needs be a very simple one.

We ju st need to determ ine the amount that is needed to go to Ottawa with. That is a very si mple decision for this com mit tee to make. I enco urage the min is ter to encour age the commit tee members to come to that point in the ir conclusion and do it tonight, that we can give a clear message to our Premier (Mr. Doer), and say, Mr . Premier, we need you to make the call now. Thank you. Mr. Gerrard: Mr. Chair man, ju st to put a few more comments on the record after having heard from many of the other members of this commit tee.

As I see the situation, we are presented qu ite clearly with a crisis in agri cul ture in Manit oba. We had th is presented to us and point after point provided in considerable det ail, not only the cir cums tances of producers. One presenter tal ked about the auctions. Other presenters tal ked about what was happening in the seed and the farm supply companies. We had a presentation provided this evening from an entrepreneur in Deloraine with a clot hin g company who talks about how her gross sales have gone down on an annual basis, something li ke $52, 000 a year since 19 98.

Clearly, the imp act of the 19 99 flood and wet weather di saster and the subsequent commodity prices have had a tremendous imp act in that area and in that community. We heard about the many businesses whic h have closed in Souris, in communities li ke Minn edosa, which I have visit ed. Busi ness after business has been closing. The estimate of the mayor some weeks ago was that 40 percent of the businesses in the community of Minne dosa were at risk. We are not talking, you know, small thi ngs. We are ta lking a major crisis.

We are talking as Wayne Motheral, the president of the Associ ation of Man itoba Munic ipal itie s, indic ated, perhaps the most serious policy issue in the last 50 years. I mean that is going a long way. It is not someth ing that we should be taking li ghtly. It is not someth in g that we should be content with presenting to the federal agricul ture committee. It is a matter that we need to take dir ectly to the Prime Min ister with a sizeable delegat ion.

I would suggest, Madam Mi nis ter, if you are concerned about not having enough eloquent speakers to convey the kind of passion and feelin g that we felt in the presentations we received, that there would be some obvious people, a li ttle girl from just south of Deloraine, as I remember, for example, who mig ht well accompany such a delegation to take some of that passion in a major way with us to Ottawa. I would go further in talking about the cur rent situation in the farming communities around Manitoba.

I think having set in place this committee, having visit ed in Dauphin, in Brandon, in Beausejour, and heard presentations last week in Winnip eg, because we have an all party effort , we have created a level of expectation that we have to meet, at least in making an all-out effort over the next I 0 days to two weeks. * (20: 10 ) As other members have pointed out, many farmers are going in to the fi elds. What is apparent is that some farmers, and some sign i ficant proport ion in some areas, are holding off, and they may be holding off in the hopes that something may come from our ef forts.

398 LEGI SLATI VE AS SEM BLY OF MAN ITOBA May 7, 200 1 Whether or not assist ance comes quickl y as a result of these ef forts, it is pretty im portant that the producers have a clear understa nding very shortly as to whether or not there will be a short term additional cash assistance, and that means that we cannot wait for the agricul ture commit tee to come here. It will be, I suspect, dif ficult for them to travel when the House of Commons is sitting, but I think the critic al thing is that is not the prim ary place where our message needs to go. Our message needs to go to members of the federal Cabinet.

Our message needs to be as strong as we can possibly make it. I think we may fail, but we must not fail to try. We must make every effort, because for our producers in Manit oba, this is extraord inarily imp ortant. It is not only im portant for producers, it is imp ortant for rural communities. It is im portant for Brandon and it is im portant for the city of Winnip eg, because we are sti ll in a major, major way an agricultu re dependent province.

The agricultural indu stry and the way this flows through into manufacturing and, as we have already dis cussed this evening, clothing, et cetera, stores, that it is im portant on behalf of all Manitoba cit izens we do the most we can possibly do. I, for one, would be tremendously di sappointed if the minis ter was content to present this material to the federal Commit tee on Agricul ture when it comes here. I think we can do better. I think we must do better. I also think that we have to put some real effort and focus into precisely what we are going to ask for.

I think we have heard discussion about $500 mil lio n. We have heard dis cussion of $40 to $60 an acre and various other options, but if we are to be effective then we have to come to a clearer consensus on prec isely what we are asking for, why it is rational and what all the evidence is. We have a lot of it, but I think that some of it needs to be brought together in a way that is going to persuade national polic ymakers, and that now is the time we must make this effort. It is very im portant to Manitobans that we make this effort.

I hope we can get agreement from the commit tee that this is the dir ection in fact we must go. Ms. Wowch uk: I just want to address a couple of issues. The Member for Emerson (Mr . Jack Penner) talked about the provin cia l sales tax. The Member for Thompson (Mr .

Ashton) was talking about the opportunity that the federal government had to remove sales tax on fuel, an excise tax on fuel. * (20:2 0) The Province right now exempts about $17 0 mill ion annually in a variety of taxes to the farming community, and I am very happy about that exemption, but the federal government, if they had the political will on a lot of these thi ngs, could address this. There was a discussion that the $500 milli on that the federal government put forward will be recovered by the federal government in less than two years across Canada through the collection of the excise tax on fuel.

Now, if that excise tax on fuel were removed, that would have a tremendous im pact on producers. That would be money that would be in producers' hands, not money that they were continuing to pay out. With respect to the additional $500 mill ion, I have to agree with the member that if there was the political will to have that $500 milli on come to farming, we would not even be having this sta ndin g commit tee meeting. It was a position taken by five provinces, along with the Canadian Federation of Agricu lture and the Quebec farming organization, asking the federal government for an additional $500 milli on.

The federal government has ignor ed that request, so there is not much political will on their part to address this whole issue. We talked about meeting with the Prime Min ister, and I wanted to ju st share with the members the last time we had a delegation to Ottawa. The Member for Arthur- Vir den (Mr. Maguir

e) was there, and he will remember, that at that meeting, it was only the two premi ers that were allowed to meet with the Prime Min ister. The rest of the delegation was not able to meet with the Prime Min ister. 1t was only the two premiers. So what are our options? Even if we get a meeting, the Prime Minis ter is not going to meet with us. That is why I am suggesting the Standing Commit tee of Agricu lture. Now, the member said, ju st another tour. Well, I am sorry,

May 7, 200 1 LE GI SLATIVE ASSE MBLY OF MANIT OBA 399 I do not think what we did going out to rural Manitoba was just another tour. I took this very seriously, for this stand in g commit tee to go out to rural Manitoba and li sten to the farmers, and I hope nobody thought of this as ju st another tour. I think in vitin g the stand in g commit tee from the federal government to come here im media tely, I do not view that as ju st another tour. I view this very, very seriously. Point of Order Mr. Jack Penner: I ju st want to correct the minis ter, if I mi ght.

There was no mention of ju st another tour by what we have already done. People have phoned me and told me that they hope that we do not need to do another tour, that they do not have to go and make more presenta tions to another commit tee touring on behalf of agri cult ure. Theref ore, I say to the min ister. Let us be careful that we do not use that language unnecessari ly, because we did the right thin g. We went and lis tened to the people. We heard the people and the people expressed their views.

The people are saying now very clearly that they hope they do not need to do that all over again, just to im press another group of people on another agricult ural tour. Mr. Cha irperson: On that point of order, I would rule that it is not a point of order. It is a di spute of the facts. *** Ms. Wowch uk: I was not meaning to offend the member. What I was sayin g was, I do not view invi tin g the federal stand ing commit tee to Manit oba as ju st another tour. I take this to be a very cred ible group of people who have been appointed by the federal government, and they have a role to play in this.

I think it is an avenue for us to get our message through to the federal government. Mr. Pitura talked about what the mes sage is, and while we may not agree on how we are going to get the message there, we all want to send the same message. This is a very serious situ ation that we are facing here, and we have to find a way to communi cate the message that we heard from the presenters. We have to find a way to communic ate that, and that is why I have made some suggest ions on the resolution.

But I also want to emphasize again that there has been dis cussion about the Premier's Office and the Premiers' need to get involv ed, and I tell you again that the Premier (Mr . Doer) has looked for support in other provinces for this, and there has been no in dic ation of support for a delegation to Ottawa. That is what the other provinces are tel li ng us right now, but there is support from other provinces to have the Standing Commit tee on Agricult ure come here. That is what we have now. That is what we have to work with.

Again, I think one of the avenues for us to get this message to the federal government again is through the Western Premi ers' Conference. We can continue to work on these issues, but there are other thi ngs. You know, we talk about how qui ckly the money can flow. The only way money can start to flow tomorrow, which we would all li ke, is for the Prime Minis ter to say yes, it is going to flow tom orrow. The message has been sent there. An Honour able Member: No, it has not. Ms. Wowch uk: The message has been sent to the federal government on this, so I am te lling you that we have to look at other avenues.

So I am saying, and I have said it before, when we heard from these people, heard a very compassionate story, it is time for Ottawa and the federal government to come and hear fir st hand from the people who are suff ering, the young girl that you talk about, Mr. Gerrard, and others, to be able to get the message and for them to see fir sthand what the situation is. Again, I want to move this along, if I can, Mr. Chairman. I have said that we have a draft here of a

summary of what we heard from the presentat ions. I would lik e to recommend that we look at the resolutions and that we come back on Wednesday with some amendments to these resolutions and have further discussion, so that we can then present our report to the Legisla ture from this resolution, and then continue to work on the other fronts that have been recommended

400 LE GI SLATI VE ASSEMBLY OF MA NIT OBA May 7, 200 1 by this commit tee, and that is, communi cation with other provinces and communic ation with the federal government. Mr. Ucrkac h: Mr. Chair, I sense a real reluctance on the part of the minis ter and some of her cohorts, colleagues, wit h regard to taking this dir ectly to the Prime Minis ter, and I think this is coming out of the Premier's Office.

I think it is sad that part of this commit tee now has decided to take its own route rather than the route of the producers who were before this commit tee, because if I heard anything from the commit tee, whether it was from the president of the Keystone Agricul tural Producers, whether it was from the grassroots organization, whether it was from indivi dual producers, or indeed from the other organizations that were here presenti ng- Mr. Cha irperson: A point of order, Ms. Wowchuk. Point of Order Ms. Wowchuk: Mr.

Chairman, the member, in his comments, ju st ind ica ted that he th in ks ther e is a lack of direction from the Premier's Office. I think it is unfair for him to attribute comments to the Premier (Mr . Doer) in that sense. He also talks about Keystone Agricultu ral Producers and their in volvement. Well, I would li ke to set the record straight that it was with the support of Keystone Agricultur al Producers that we made the decision to invite the federal Stand ing Commit tee on Agricul tur e to come to Mani toba to hear first-hand.

It was in a dis cussion with the Premier and the Keystone Agricultu ral Producers that that decision was made. So I would not want the member to be att ributing comments to the Premier when he is not in the room. Mr. Chair person: Mr. Derkach, on the same point of order. Mr. Derkach : Well, to the same point of order, Mr. Chair , I was sim ply in dicating what was said at the hearings. If we need to substantiate that, ther e is a record of what was said.

As a matter of fact, I read the presentat ion made by the Keystone Agricultu ral Producers this afternoon, so theref ore, I know of what I speak, and to that point of order, I had not finis hed my comments yet. Mr. Cha irperson: Is ther e any more advice on the point of order? The point of order is strictly a ruling on the rules that we have in place. Mr. Jack Penner: I find it very interesting, Mr. Chai rman, that the minis ter would now attribute the reference to the Standing Commit tee on Agricu lture as being the brainchild of the general farm organ ization of this prov in ce.

It was impl ied by her reference of a meeting that she had wit h the president or members of the Keystone Agricul tur e Producers. She impl ied that they, in fact, mi ght have advised her to in vite the Standing Committee on Agricu lture. Or am I mi srepresenting the facts here? Or was it the min ister advising the Keystone Agricu lture Producers that she would prefer to invit e the stand ing commi ttee to appear here, and they concur red? Which way was it? * (20:30) Mr. Cha irperson : This is turning into a debate. It is not a debate. It is a point of order. I will rule that ther e was no point of order.

It is a dispute over the facts. I want to remind all commit tee members that points of order need to deal with the rules. It is not a debate over the content of the topic here tonight. I think everybody understands that. * * * Mr. Chair person: Mr. Derkach, to continue wit h your remarks. Mr. Derkach : Thank you, Mr. Chair. May I continue?

I heard very clearly, and as a matter of fact, the comments that were made by numerous producers-whether they represented organi za tions or whether they represented themselv es, as individu al producers, or Mani tobans-that this matter had to be presented to the Prime Minis ter. If you li sten to the presentat ions, they were not tal kin g about a stand ing commit tee on agri cul ture which would do another road show in Manit oba. Nobody-but nobody-mentioned that, except for the min ister. Mr.

Chair, to indi cate that, somehow, what we heard of the commit tee hearings was a plea to bring the Standing Co mmit tee on Agricu lture

May 7, 200 1 LEGI SLATI VE ASSEMBLY OF MAN ITOBA 40 1 back to Manit oba is ju st not accurate. It does not reflect at all what we heard. So, Mr . Chair, what we are trying to put on the table here is a reflection of what we heard from producers and the people who presented to this commit tee. Now, I have to say I was not at the commit tee in Dauphin, nor in Brandon, nor in Beausejour. So, in fact, if there were cal ls for the sta ndin g commit tee-the federal Standing Commit tee on Agricul ture-to come to the province at those meeting s, I did not hear it.

But I did not hear, and I was present here at the Legisla ture when the commit tee presented-and there was not one sin gle comment made with regard to having yet another road show by the federal Standing Commit tee on Agricul ture. What was demanded, and what was requested, and what was pled for was that we, as a commit tee of all parties of this legis lature, approach the federal government -i.e. the Prime Minis ter-to indeed act on the request of putting more money into agriculture im mediately, as the fir st step. Yes, we heard about other issues such as draina ge.

We heard about such issues as a longer-term safety net program. But the most immedia te concern was for an imme dia te cash injection, this spring, to be able to get producers through this period of time when they have to put their crops in. A month from now, the crops have to be in. It is not going to help if we start talking about a stand in g commit tee meeting in June or July. That has to happen almost imm ediately. Mr. Chair, from our side and from what I hear from Doctor Gerrard, there seems to be a will to indeed move on this rather quickly. My colleague, Mr.

Pit ura, put it qu ite succinctly when he suggested that we do not have to take si mply one action. But we can actu ally make a request of the Prime Minis ter to meet with him; in vite the other provinces to join our Premier (Mr . Doer) to do that; and secondly, then allow that Standing Commit tee on Agricul ture to come to Manitoba-or wherever-to hear presentat ions, if that, in deed, is something that needs to be done, probably, for the longer term kind of approach that needs to be taken with regard to agri cultur e support. So, Mr.

Chair, I guess what I am hearing tonight is not in step with what I heard from the producers. I will stand up and say this publicly, that it is not what we heard from producers. I cannot help-and I guess my comment stands. I do not think this dir ection is coming from our min ister. I think this is a dir ection that is coming from the Pr emier (M r. Doer) to his min ister, who says: Ask for the stand in g committee, not for a meeting with the Prime Min ister. Otherw ise, why are we not going to the Prime Mi nis ter? What downside is there? Yes, there was a meeting with the Prime Min ister.

But I say that if you have other premier s of other ju risdictions joinin g you, and even if you do not, with the organiz ations -and the min is ter ref erred to the young woman who presented to this committee. You take some of those people with you to Ottawa, so that they can face the Prime Min ister eyeball to eyeball. If they cannot make the ir point, then this country is in a sad state of affairs. Because I think all of us heard the compassion that these people had for their li vel ihoods and for their famil ies. They were not ask in g for anything but a level playing field with other ju risdictions.

If we cannot take that simple message to Ottawa, dir ectly to the Prime Min is ter of our country, then, Mr. Chair and Madam Minis ter, we are not doing our job. I am sorry. I will support a resolution that asks for the federal Standing Commit tee on Agr icult ure to come to Manitoba, or to come to the Prairies to li sten. However, I cannot support a resolution li ke that if it does not inclu de an action which calls for our Premier to lead an all party delegation to Ottawa. My Leader will stand right alongside the Premier (Mr. Doer) to face the Prime Minis ter, the Min ister of Fi nance (Mr .

Seli nger), the Minis ter of Agricult ure (Ms. Wowchuk), in Ottawa to ask for the support that our producers deserve. Nothing less. That is all I am asking of this commit tee, to think about it. Let us take our ideological blinkers off here, ladies and gent lemen, because there is no place for it in this all-party commit tee. Mr. Cum mings: Well, Mr. Chairman, I am not sure if I can match the eloquence of my colleague from Russ ell, but I want to reiter ate what I was trying to say when I previously spoke to this resolution. That we want to hring forward

402 LEG IS LATI VE AS SEM BLY OF MA NIT OBA May 7, 200 1 out of the commit tee the absolute urgency and the fact that we have to, in my view, elevate it to the hig hest decision-making level in this country. That requi res that those who are the btders of our western provinces be involved. I am sure that there are many times when all of us have ind icated to friends, relatives and famil y, you will never know what the answer is until you ask. Or you will not achieve anything if you do not try . My colleague said it very succinctly.

I belie ve there is a will to support the request for the standing committee, but it has to be coupled with a predisposition and a previous move to the Prime Min ister, which calls me to put another comment on the record. If this falls into the realm of partisan comment in this committee, then I am sure that the minis ter and her colleagues will call me to order. Frankly, I think we have pre-empted ourselves in the route that we have gone by making an announcement the other night that we had inv ited the stand ing committee.

To some extent, we weakened our hand to ask for that one-off meeting as quickly as possible with the Prime Min ister. There was some outr age expressed on our part at that time, albeit we wanted to maintain unanimity in this committee. I really urge the members of the Government side of this com mit tee, not to think of this as a win -lose, or put tin g their Premier (Mr. Doer), our Premier of this province, in an awkward position.

We are saying on this side of the table-t beli eve you heard almost all of us, inclu di ng the thir d party, indi cate that we would support that dir ection. * (20:40) So we are all in the same boat.

If there is a fear of the Premier being put in an awkward position and being forced to take no for an answer, and I hope that would not be the possi bility, but if that is what the fear is, then, by golly, every ML A in this province, every grain and oilseed producer in this province, and I would guess a large percentage of those who are interested observers with a vested in terest as consumers and as residents of this province, will all be angry. We will not be angry at the Premier, we will be angry at the Prime Minis ter. But we need to come out of this commit tee with a will ingness to put the question to him.

Mr. Gerrard: Just briefly, several points. think that there needs to be a decision as to which dir ection we are going to take this. The Minis ter of Agricu lture (Ms. Wowchuk) and the Government will need to show some leadership and decide whether they are going to put a motion tonight and sett le this, or whether, in fact, you are going to take this back to your caucus and bring this back to be sett led Wednesday ni ght, if that is when we are meeting. The motion, I think, should have not only where this is going, but should have some indic ation of what kind of time frame.

I thin k that is im portant for all commit tee members, and it is im portant for the farmers. If it is going to go to the federal stand ing commit tee, then that is one thin g. If it is going to the Prime Minis ter, that is another, but in whi chever dir ection, the motion should indic ate what kin d of time frame we are going to act in, so that people in Manit oba will know.

I thin k that taking aside the process issue of how this moves forward, and maybe before I fully move off this, I will make one more point and that is, that we have both the Standing Commit tee on Agricult ure, and we have this new federal commit tee, which is going to report next fall. I think that farmers and presenters at the commit tee meeting s ind icated that they were not very happy with a report next fall, given the urgency of the situation.

Gi ven that you have two commit tees, I am not convi nced that you are going to get action from the stand in g commit tee federally on agri cultur e before next fall, even if it is dif ferent from the commit tee which is touring the country. I think that this is a matter that needs to go straight to the Prime Minis ter and that we need to make that effort. But that will have to be your judgment, si nce you have the majority of votes on this committee. The second point, and that is back to the Member for Thompson's (Mr. Ashton). What is our message? Here again, we clearly need some work.

The Minis ter of Agr icult ure (Ms. Wowchuk) has talked about the additional $500 milli on that was part of the original resolution. I think there was varied enthusia sm for that number, and that as we heard presentations, there was indeed, perhaps, much more

May 7, 200 1 LEG IS LATI VE ASSEMBLY OF MAN ITOBA 403 enthusia sm for a number that was put in terms of $40 to $60 an acre. But I think that the issue here is, if the Minis ter of Agricult ure has already done some homework and found that there is not much appeal to the $500 mill ion, it is up to the Minis ter of Agricultu re to show some leadership in putting forward alternate approaches, because the huge majority of producers did talk about a cash inf usion of some sort, urgent assistance for farmers.

I thin k there could be a variety of ways that this could come together, and it real ly is up to the Minis ter of Agricultu re and the Government to kick this off with some concrete suggest ions. We have been around, and we have been here now for, oh, someth ing more than two hours. I know that it may be the in tention to bring something on Wednesday, but it cert ainly would help move th ings forward if the minis ter was ready to put some more details, or some more ideas, on the table that could be di scussed or thought about between now and Wednesday.

Let me add one more note, and this is from a farmer in an area of Man it oba that is quite badly affected. He was recently ta lkin g to his banker. Although he is a mix ed farmer and not in this situation, his banker made the comment that none, I say none, of the producers who were farming and producing only grains and oils eeds, had come to the bank this year for their normal loan. That was rather an unusual comment or situation, because that would be very, very di fferent from the normal ci rcumstances.

What it is lik ely to indi cate, is that those who are farmin g grain and oils eeds in that area, are in an extr aordina ry cash crunch, not able, because of the way that they are fin anced, to go to the bank for any additional dollars. As we have seen some comments today of producers who are not out in the field, I think it is im portant that the min ister and the Department of Agricu ltur e, on an urgent basis, get a li ttle better handle on the situation around the province and the cir cums tances among produc ers, because this crisis may be even more urgent than many have given credit.

We cert ainly heard that. Cert ainly, from the department's perspec tive, it would be critical to have the most cur rent inf ormation availa ble and to be able to present this factually, with eloquence and with support, to whi chever form the minis ter chooses. Mr. Maguire: Mr . Chairman, I just want to make sure the commit tee is clear on the comments I made previously, a good hour ago. I am not against the Prime Minis ter corn ing to Mani toba.

I am cert ainl y not against the Ag Standing Committee com ing to Manit oba. if we could convince them to do it, but I think it would be part of my honourable colleague from Morris's suggestion that if they come. the commit tee, particula rly, would be the periph eral player in this process, not that the issue sti ll li es in the Prime Minis ter's hands. My honourable colleague for River Heig hts (Mr.

Gerrard) and I were having a dis cussion here about the dif ferentiation between the committees that are out there today in the federal realm, and while we are an Ag commit tee that ju st spent some time doing hearings in Manit oba in this process, I ind ic ated that the federal commi ttee has been out here before, some thr ee years ago, two-and a-half years, over thr ee years ago, the fall of '98, and they may come again someday.

But, right now, we have a federal Commit tee on Agri � cul ture in Ottawa and we have a Prime Min ister who has not-1 mean, one thing we heard in this whole process, many time s, was: Does Ottawa just not get it? * (20:50) I will comment on those remarks right now. The people that I talked to or who talked to me on this issue feel that way because the federal Prime Minis ter ju st put a commit tee together this spring to travel across Canada, not just the Prairies, on an agricult ural basis, with the member from St. James, Charleswood, Assini boia, Mr.

Harvard in this case, being the Manit oba representative, the former Ag House Commit tee Chair man, and three senators from Saskatchewan, Alberta and British Columbia. to look at what is needed in agricu lture and report to the federal government in the fall of 2002. I will te ll you-and I do not think I have to te ll the mini ster-what is being said about that commit tee in the country. It is chaired by Mr . Speller, a respectable indivi dual who has also been the Hous e of Commons Ag Commit tee Chair, and I made presentat ions before Bob as well.

He is a member from southern Ontario, the Wi ndsor area, Chatham, who ind icated to me at

404 LEGI SLATIVE ASSE MBL Y OF MA NIT OBA May 7, 200 1 a meeting last summer that-you know, he says, those issues in western Canada, they are so compl icated. li e says: I cannot understand west ern issues, and now he is the person that the Prime Minis ter has appointed to be the Chair of this committee. So I dif ferentiate between that group and the House of Commons Ag Committee. The honourable Member for River Heig hts (Mr.

Ger rard) has ind icated that what is the li keli hood of the House of Commons Ag Com mit tee coming out here to hear presentat ions when they already have a commi t tee that is coming out to do that very thin g. We do not know when they are coming. I do not even know if they know what their mandate is yet. I am sure the minis ter has been in discussion with the federal minis ter on this, but we have had some discussions with Mr. Speller, and I do not have a clear di rection of what he thinks the agenda is going to be and his plan yet.

I think the House of Commons Ag Commit tee would be-l do not know if they would feel lik e they were superseding the work of the commit tee that the Prime Minis ter has already put in place and stepping on the Prime Minis ter's toes if they come out here. I do not know all of those logistics. I am ju st laying them out. Just a couple of comments: I have a couple of quotes here on thin gs that I hear in the country on this federal process chair ed by Mr. Speller.

Many fanners have indica ted to me that they call this a "tr avelling road show." Another quote is: "a make-work project for back benchers." Another quote is: "If they are serious, they would act by now because cert ainly they have heard from farm groups and indivi duals all winter about what the problem is." The other quote is: "What have they been li st ening to?" I guess the only reason that I was so passionate, if I could use that term, in my plea of the minis ter and the commit tee before about tr yin g to take this dir ectly to where it needs to go to get the imp act that the producers who came and took the serious time to make the presentat ion to us want is, because we do not-1 mean, I ask the committee: Do we want to be painted with the same brush that that commit tee is being painted with?

I have a great problem with saying we need to li sten to this same commit tee, so that we can go home and get tarred and feathered with the same brush. all of us on both sides of the House, all members, for saying: Well, do you guys not know that the guy who is the st umbling block in this whole process is the Prime Minis ter? Farmers came and appeared before us. Many of them appeared before us through desperation, as we saw in some of the presentations to us. They also said that they came because we are basically the only show on the road. You came forward. You were the only show there. You are in Manit oba.

It is nic e to see you gett ing out and around. Maybe you could have done it sooner, but we were there and we heard them. You saw, I would call it depression, seriousness with many of these presentat ions. They indica ted they came before us because they felt they had exhausted most of the other routes that they have. I mean, you saw the desperation of some of these people. We may have been the only game in town, if you want to put it that way. I guess that is all I have to say on that, Madam Min is ter.

In regard to my col league from Ri ver Heig hts and others here, I guess I would only say that there are farmers out there who do not have th eir business plan in place yet, and they may not have gone to the banker because they are afraid to go. They see a li ttle bit of li ght at the tunne l. They are hoping that the ir CMAP payment shows up real qui ck. There is a Wheat Board payment that if they had an automatic account is already in there or will arrive this week, and the adju stment payment, anywhere from, say, an average of eight bucks.

We put $1 15 milli on in the Prairies on the call that is out there on the wheat today, maybe a li ttle more if it is up to 80 percent now, and the inte rest-f ree cash advance they can use. They have ind icated to me that they need those three li ttle pots of money in their own operation to pay off last year's accounts to get enough credit or equ ity built up in their operat ion to go to the bank to get the lin e of credit they need this year. They know it will be late in the middl e of May, if they can put that together.

They should be out seeding now, but if those all arrive by the end of this week they can sti ll, perhaps, get enough funds from their ...

May 7, 200 1 LEG ISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MAN IT OBA 405 banker to put a crop in the ground this spring, albeit two weeks later than it would nor mally be put, even if it is three weeks later. So what they are doing is stav ing off elimin ation, if you will, trying to protect their assets for one mor e year and roll the dice again and hope that the commodity prices incr ease or they get a bumper crop or a high qualit y crop. That is how close this thing is to the line in some of these operations right now.

Having said that, I guess I can only make the plea again that we do not get painted with the same brush as the federal government, that we do not allow ourselves to fall in that same trap as, I think, they have themselves in, by not li st enin g to people. I know the federal government has lots of issues on their plate, but this is a serious one, this is the one that is the nuts and bolts of agri cult ure.

If you look at groups li ke the Ontario Corn Producers, the Ontario Wheat Producers Market ing Board and the Ontario Soybean Growers, I think you would find that they are basically all on-side with the kinds of process that we are working with here tonight. I certa inly saw it in the last issue of the Corn Producer magazine that I got just over the weekend. It was delivered to my home. You can look at the resolutions that came before that group in their meeting this spring, and they are virtually on li ne with the parity ideas and the programming that we are looking at here and trying to come forward with.

So I beseech the commit tee to take that approach of, first of all, going to the Prime Minis ter, because I think that is where the province of Mani toba, at least the farmers of Manitoba, want us to target our efforts, from the consensus that we heard around this table. Thank you. Mr. Smith: The Member for Riv er Heights (Mr. Gerrard) has identified a couple of points that I want to expand on. Just li st ening to the conver sat ion around the table here tonight, I do not think it is disputed. I think we can all agree that we identified what the many, many people came and presented to us.

We know the crisis that is ou

Document details

Collection	Manitoba — Debates (Hansard)
Citation	37-2-ag6
Type	hansard
Volume / chapter	37th 2nd hansardpdf ag6.pdf
Language	en
Format	pdf
Source	PROVINCIAL
Identifier	789e4fd2f23e08b8784b41329940a9d7c68f517d

Source file is stored in the law ingest library (pdf).