* (1110)

Mr. Chairperson (Marcel Laurendeau): Will the Committee of Supply come to order, please. This section of the Committee of Supply will be dealing with the Estimates of the Department of Agriculture. Would the minister's staff please enter the Chamber at this time.

Hon. Harry Enns (Minister of Agriculture): Allow me simply to introduce senior staff of the Department of Agriculture. My deputy minister, Don Zasada, regional director, Les Baseraba and my policy advisor, associate deputy minister, Craig Lee.

Earlier on in the week, we had commenced with our agricultural Estimates and its review. I am delighted to have this opportunity to provide this opportunity to my Agriculture critic from the New Democratic Party, who, by the way, looks very spiffy today. I want to invite her to put any additional comments on the record about this unforeseen turn of events. We are discussing agriculture, and while we have allowed ourselves a fair bit of latitude in terms of which topics we want to discuss, we have dealt with the major corporations, the Manitoba Crop Insurance Corporation, the Manitoba Agricultural Credit Corporation. We could be on a policy line of the Estimates right now, under which we could have a wide latitude of discussion.

I certainly want to invite my own colleagues, the honourable member for Arthur-Virden (Mr. Downey) and other colleagues, my colleague from Springfield (Mr. Findlay) or from Emerson (Mr. Penner), to also participate in an expression of concerns that face agriculture and how governments, provincially and federally, should be responding to them. Thank you.

Ms. Rosann Wowchuk (Swan River): The minister just indicated that we were on the policy line. I want to thank the minister for allowing us to move–

Mr. Chairperson: Order, please. The honourable minister, on a point of order?

Mr. Enns: Just further clarification. I apologize for interrupting. My staff advises me that we were actually on the AIDA line, the farm income support line, when we adjourned the committee when we were last dealing with the Estimates. So it is quite appropriate, the subject matter that I know that the honourable member wishes to discuss.

Ms. Wowchuk: Mr. Chairman, it is very timely that we should be able to discuss agriculture this morning. We are facing a very serious situation. We have raised the issue of the flooding and the problem of not being able to seed probably close to a million acres in this province many times over the last couple of weeks. Our Leader has raised the issue as a lead question several times, and we have had lots of discussion on it. We have been hoping that we would get some answers that would help our producers and give some stability to them to know that there is going to be some cash flow and getting some answers.

We know that there was an announcement on AIDA, and we talked briefly about that the other day and how our concern is that the AIDA program is a very flawed program. Although the federal government has made some changes, it is going to mean very little cash flow coming into the community because many people do not qualify for AIDA. The government made announcements on NISA, and again, although there is money in NISA, many of the producers, young producers in particular, have no money in NISA.

So we are looking for how we can help farmers. We were hoping that the federal government would do this, but in fact they are not going to, so today's action, an agreement of all parties to work together to try to come to some resolution on this. When the member for Arthur-Virden (Mr. Downey) brought forward this resolution to try to work through this problem that we have. The concern we have is that there is not going to be any cash flow, that there is going to be loss of economic growth or loss of jobs, and a crash of the economy in that part of the province.

We looked at the resolution and we are prepared to make a few amendments. The Leader of the Opposition yesterday suggested an all-party committee that we could work on to perhaps work through the problems that we have, come up with some solutions, pressure the federal government to realize that they have a role to play in this. Just as they found money to help those people in the Red River flood, they should be able to find money for the farmers in the southwest part of the province.

Federal governments nor provincial governments should determine how much support they are going to give to producers who are in crisis, should not be determining it on the basis of whether or not they are in a federal election; unfortunately, that is what happened. During the 1997 flood, there was a federal election. The Prime Minister came out. He was not quite sure what to do with a sandbag, but he came out to help out. He did not know what to do with the sandbag, and then we had all kinds of announcements ahead of the federal government from people who were candidates in that election, but they found money all over the place.

Now we have a group of farmers, 4,000 families perhaps, who are at risk of losing their income. Many of them that we talked to are worried that they may not be able to hang on to their farms. Where are all these people going to go? Are we going to send them all off to Winnipeg to look for jobs here in the city, or are we going to lose more people out of the province? We have to take a strong stand and encourage the federal government to recognize that the provincial government has made some moves, but it should not be the province that picks up these costs.

So I say to the Minister of Agriculture (Mr. Enns), I would ask him whether he would support the possibility of an all-party committee to try to resolve this, to pressure the federal government. Certainly we do not have the Liberals on board today. I am really disappointed in Dr. Jon Gerrard who is not in the Chamber now, who from outside the Chamber is denying us the ability to debate an issue that is so important, denying us the ability to talk about this crisis in this Chamber.

I cannot imagine a man who was, during the last federal election, a candidate and was supporting all the assistance to farmers in the Red River Valley, now, as the Leader of the Liberal Party, he would deny us the ability to have this debate. What he is saying is that the Liberal Party does not support the farm community. The Liberal Party does not recognize that there is a crisis in rural Manitoba. The Liberal Party does not recognize that we have low commodity prices, increased input costs. Hundreds of people have spent thousands of dollars to prepare the land and put fertilizer into the land, and now they are losing that. He does not understand that.

Mr. Chairman, we have to find a way, through this Chamber, to recognize that this is a very serious problem. I do not know whether we can educate the provincial Liberals on this to stand with us and lobby Ottawa, but we have to find a way to stand together, put politics aside, and I think we have to pull the two provinces together. Saskatchewan is affected as badly as we are, and their farmers are suffering. We have to find a way to be nonpartisan about this and recognize that there is a crisis here and that we have to put pressure.

So I ask the minister: does he support the concept of an all-party committee? Does he see a way that we can put pressure on the federal government to get money and some commitment that will see money flow into farmers' hands through other avenues, other than AIDA and NISA? There was money in the JERI program during the Red River flood. There was money that was available to help farmers with their fertilizer costs and the land with chemical costs. The people in the southwest part of the province right now are facing another serious problem, and that is weed control. The cost of cleaning up those weeds and getting that soil back into some kind of condition that they can grow a crop next year is critical, and the federal government has to recognize that there is a need. They come to aid in other crises.

* (1120)

Now the federal government tells us that the province has not taken the necessary steps to trigger the disaster assistance. We have seen the letters that the province has written So what steps can we take? Are you prepared to have this all-party committee? Are we prepared to put pressure on the federal government through this Legislature to ensure that those issues are addressed?

Mr. James Downey (Arthur-Virden): I do not want to take the time of the opposition, to take away from their time, but I do feel it is important that I put a couple of comments on the record as the member for Arthur-Virden and particularly in light of the unfortunate position that the member for The Maples (Mr. Kowalski) was put in by the Leader of the Liberal Party who does not have a seat in the Manitoba Legislature. He is, as an honourable member, the member for The Maples, and I quite frankly feel for him as the message that he had to deliver today that his Leader wanted to use his political power over this Assembly for what he saw as his own political good–that is a shame.

He is doing so on the backs and at the expense of people in not only southwestern Manitoba but other parts of Manitoba that are so stressed out, Mr. Chairman, that the parties in this Legislature, the elected members of this Legislature took the decision this morning to bring it to the general public forum, which we should be doing, to debate some of the possible solutions and how in fact we could get to resolve some of the problems. Again, I have to say, as much as the Leader of the Liberal Party may not understand it, the media, the general public throughout Manitoba I now think have a relatively good understanding of how serious the situation is, and just let me paint it very quickly.

We have producers who have the same kinds of financial commitments as people on a wage or a salary. Whether it is in the North, the south, the city or wherever, they have commitments to make. Their children want to go to school and to the different programs that they have to to get education; they have certain day-to-day commitments to keep their households alive.

What they are faced with today is for some 18 months, 18 months from today, they will not have any return off the land that they in fact are responsible for farming. So how would anyone in society, if you are a wage earner, like to be faced with a situation where there will not be a pay cheque this fall from what you would put in the ground; there will not be a pay cheque next spring from the produce you would be selling whether it is through the Canadian Wheat Board or wherever it is from, and you will not have until next fall any potential income off of the land? What kind of mental stress does this place on a family of young people who are trying to make a go of it in a society today which, yes, we have couples working, we have everyone working because everybody wants more, but everybody has to do that to maintain the lifestyle which has become part of the Manitoba and Canadian way.

The unfortunate thing is that we should have had the opportunity to debate that here this morning and again collectively send a message to Ottawa, but we have again the Leader of the Liberal Party playing a political card to deny that from taking place, in some way trying to defend the Liberal government in Ottawa which, the last time I checked, do not need a whole lot of defending in western Canada.

The point again that has to be made is–and I say this to the minister as well, and it is important to note–that I compliment our minister. I do not want to be overly political. I compliment opposition members because the resolution had friendly amendments that recognize all members have been concerned on this, people from this Legislative Assembly, the Premier (Mr. Filmon), the Minister of Agriculture (Mr. Enns), my colleagues who not only live in the area but have spent time in those communities. Several times they have been out there and have felt the stress of those people.

We were in Melita at a meeting with municipal people, with the Premier and the Minister of Agriculture. You could feel the desperation of those people who were still, at the first part of June, watching it rain and could not get on their land. Why they are stressed is because they have commitments and they will not be able to fulfill the commitments. In fact, many of them are threatened.

Now, let me just go over why I think the Minister of Agriculture in Ottawa missed the mark. He said what he will do is advance 60 percent of the AIDA program. Well, first of all, CAP, the people who speak for farmers and farmers themselves, and our own Minister of Agriculture, the member for Lakeside (Mr. Enns), was reluctant to enter the program because he said it is basically flawed and will not meet the needs of producers. Let me point out a couple of reasons why it is flawed. We have not had the greatest of times in agriculture in the last couple of years. Prices have been low. If your income last year was not very good and this year your margin is very small, you are not going to get anything out of the AIDA program. A lot of producers who have phoned me fall in that category. They may get a few hundred dollars, but a lot of them will not get any.

I will give you an example. The producer next to me, and he said it publicly with the meeting of Mr. Vanclief, he said he is farming 2,000-some acres. He has a very small percentage, 8 percent of his crop in. He cannot get it in. He has three young children. He has commitments to make. He does not get any money out of AIDA virtually. His brother, who is a pharmacist, who owns some land of which he farms will get a substantial amount of money out of AIDA. Where is the fairness? Where is the fairness in the federal government's mind? It is incredible.

We have many producers for management's sake. I had a phone call yesterday who said my year-end for the reporting period ends the end of June, right now, because it was management. He is covered for '97-99, '98-99, but he does not get the results of his '99 crop. He missed it because his own financial year ends the end of June.

There are many people who are eliminated from the program because of that. That is not fair. Every time we turn around, we keep talking about such a fair society that Canada is. Well, it is, but we need to have the people in the administrative offices that deliver that fairness, and that is not happening. A lot has been said about NISA. Opening up a savings account is a great idea. We all believe in savings accounts, but again if you have either been under financial pressures or you have not been farming, new farmers coming on, this is their first year, they say, so what help is that, you have not any savings. It is absolutely a move that the federal government made, got the headlines that I am sure they will like, but the end result they will not.

I can also tell the minister, I have had calls that there is a rally being prepared and developed for the Melita community on Tuesday night. There is a group of farmers that is going to gather to develop a strategy. Unfortunately, what the federal minister has done is caused people to be very upset. When you get large gatherings of people like that, then sometimes it is not always the best result that comes out of it. We do not need to have disruptions in our society and people put through the stresses. They are talking about potential blockage of roads which is inappropriate, but again people are pressed to do inappropriate things because of irresponsible actions of government. Those are the kinds of things that I think we could have debated here this morning, if we would have had the opportunity to do so with the private member's resolution which, by the way, is not going to be a secret. If the Liberal leader of the party in Manitoba thinks that this is not going to be distributed and talked about, he has got another thought coming.

I want to go back again: no one is playing politics with this. That is why I am telling you the people of the city of Winnipeg do not want to play politics with the lives of any part of this country. There is a lot of pressure in our society today to help the people of Cape Breton who, by the way, are losing their livelihoods. I think the federal government to us are seen to be responsive and acting to it. They do not ask those people to take money out of their savings account. I think the federal government have offered $60 million or $80 million. I am not going to speak to the amount and the appropriateness of the amount, but what I am hearing is the federal government is sympathetic. They are not saying there is a program in place for you. They are saying here is some extra consideration for the people of Cape Breton.

* (1130)

What did they say to the people of the ice storms? They did not say, use your Canada Savings Bonds or your savings account or your pension funds to live off. They said: We will come with some support. We have said many times our farmers deserve at least the same programs as the people in the Red River Valley when flooded. I compliment my colleagues for taking that stand because, again, it is the whole issue of fairness in the country of Canada.

Something else that when we are in these situations, and I know it is important that we put on the table, I also think that when one looks across the country, we can have many examples. The Peace River Valley, for example, which the Premier (Mr. Filmon) mentioned the other day and my colleague has referred to, paid an acreage payment to those producers when they were flooded out.

Mr. Chairman, this is not a matter about bureaucratic formulas or whether somebody may get paid a few dollars more. There are systems in place that can deal with that. We can make sure that people who get paid and should not, do not continue to keep those resources, but I can tell you there are many people who will not have an income for at least 18 months. They have commitments to make, and I am really troubled that the Leader of the Liberal Party in Manitoba would use his political influence over his member in this House to deny the debate. So the politics of this, if he says it is political activity we are involved in, he is the one who is carrying out the political activity not the Province of Manitoba or any members who are sitting in this House.

So I say in my concluding comments to the minister, if I have to conclude with a question and I think it is important that he respond to this, I think in the next few days and would hope that he and my colleagues would come out with a very clear definitive statement as to exactly what the Province of Manitoba is going to do in this situation to force the federal government to come to the table with the same kind of proposal. People have asked for $50 an acre on unseeded acreage. I agree with that. I think, if we put a $25 offer forward, which I have heard my minister talk about, that 60 percent of that would be a $35 payment from the federal government. If it is an advance on AIDA, fine, use that money. But if they have other money, use that as well. The payment for fertilizer that has been spent, we need the same commitment and the same support on paying half of it to the producers. The unseeded acreage has been well appreciated, although some people would say not. I say it has been.

I think also, again, what this House has to look at, and I would suggest to the Department of Agriculture, that crop insurance has been and should continue to be the instrument which protects people against natural disasters. Well, we have never lost a crop and it has always been said we have never lost a crop in the spring of the year in any part of the province of Manitoba. Well, history was made this year. I think since a hundred and some years of that area and some areas being cultivated, this is the first time there will not be a crop planted and a crop harvested. So people did not take on unseeded acreage insurance. That is why it is incumbent upon crop insurance to make some moves so that the farmers are covered on an unseeded acreage basis at a reasonable level. I make the reference to the same kind of ability to buy crop insurance for unseeded acreage as they now are able to buy for hail insurance, that if you lose 50 acres because of unseeded, you get paid for 50 acres unseeded. You do not have again another way of taking away from that because you have had crop on other pieces of ground. Let them insure for what they lose. There may be some people who would argue against it, but I can tell you, I am a strong supporter of that.

Today, there is a release gone out again from what they call the RDR, the Rural Disaster Recovery Coalition, from KAP. I will table it, Mr. Chairman, so that everybody has it. It is made up of the Manitoba Cattle Producers, Brandon Chamber of Commerce, Association of Manitoba Municipalities, Canadian Association of Ag Retailers, Brandon Economic Development Board, Manitoba Chamber of Commerce and Canada West Equipment Dealers. They are all supporting what we are asking for. That is why I cannot understand why the federal government are taking what I would consider a very tough, callous position. It is almost an uninformed position that I think they are taking. Mr. Vanclief, with the greatest of respect, should tell his bureaucrats what the public will not tolerate, and that is what his job is.

So I conclude my comments, Mr. Chairman, and I thank the opposition for giving up their time for allowing me to put those comments on the record. I do compliment my colleague the Minister of Agriculture (Mr. Enns), our Premier (Mr. Filmon), and colleagues for being extremely sensitive and, I would say, proactive to the issues that they are having to deal with. Thank you.

Hon. Leonard Derkach (Minister of Rural Development): Mr. Chairman, I would like to rise to put some remarks on the record as they relate to the situation in western Manitoba. I want to say thank you to the opposition critic for Agriculture, who, I think, has been able to put the issue of politics aside in a situation where, indeed, we all have to do that and look at what we can do to support not only the farm families, but the communities in general, in western Manitoba who are undergoing some very, very serious times.

I am actually shocked this morning because I could not believe that one who is not even elected to the Legislature has used his power, through another member of the Legislature, to deny an ability for this Legislature to debate a situation in this province which is as grave as we have ever had in terms of disasters in this province. I just cannot believe that the leader of a political party, who wants to enter this Chamber at some point in time, would be so callous and would lack such understanding that he would deny leave to debate a situation that I think all Manitobans would want us to debate as an important issue in this Legislature.

Mr. Chairman, I want to congratulate also the position that has been taken by our Minister of Agriculture (Mr. Enns), who, indeed, is facing an enormous amount of pressure as he deals with the farmers of Manitoba to try and create a climate of some comfort out there, in a very difficult situation, to assure them that as a province he and his department and this government and Manitobans in general are supportive of giving some much-needed support to that region of our province.

When the Leader of the Opposition (Mr. Doer) yesterday indicated that his party would be prepared to join the government of Manitoba to lead a delegation to Ottawa, I think this shows that there is indeed an understanding and concern for the plight of Manitobans today in the face of some very difficult situations. I think we all together collectively understand the importance of this.

I come from the western side of the province, as does the member for Swan River (Ms. Wowchuk), and I guess through the phone calls that we get we hear some fairly serious situations on farms right now, where families are feeling enormous stress because of the fact that there is no grain in the ground. There is no crop in the ground. They have no prospect of getting any kind of income this fall.

What that means is, of course, somebody in that family is going to have to start searching for a job very quickly. Then, again, that has been hampered by the fact that today we are seeing businesses in these rural communities not hiring anyone; as a matter of fact, the opposite is happening, as the commercial side of the community is also starting to feel the impact of this situation. Let us not fool ourselves, that is going to be felt right through our whole economy and right through the province of Manitoba and right here in the city of Winnipeg.

I think, by and large, from talking to the people in this city, they have a clear understanding of the magnitude of the situation. I am really appreciative of the fact that people in the city have stopped me and have asked questions and have expressed their concern about what is happening in the west side of the province.

It is just unfortunate that the Leader of the Liberal Party does not have that understanding. I do not know whether he is just basically out of touch with what is happening in this province or whether he is just drumming up, I guess, the political favours of the Liberal caucus in Ottawa.

* (1140)

Mr. Chairman, let us just examine what the real situation in western Manitoba today is. Although it is the farmers who are the first line of people who are facing this tremendous challenge, we cannot underestimate the impact that this is going to have on every individual in the western side of the province in the near future. This is not a problem that can be solved overnight. It is not a situation that is going to change in the next six months. It is not a situation that will change in the next year. This is going to be around for the next 18 months at least, before people can actually get back on their feet, if they can get back on their feet at all.

Mr. Chairperson, when you consider that this is a creation of wealth that is going to be lost to the production of wealth in our province for good. This is not something that is just postponed. It is lost. It is not coming back. It is not going to be able to be circulated in our communities at all, so there are some really difficult issues that are being faced by us in the western part of the province, indeed, in our neighbouring province as well. I know that the Premier of our province has been in discussions with the Premier of Saskatchewan, because they are facing the same situation.

I cannot believe the insensitivity of the federal government to this situation in Manitoba today because in 1997 we saw the outpouring, if you like, of concern by federal members of Parliament, by the government. The Prime Minister made a point of coming to Manitoba to view the situation, and at that time, I thought his intentions were sincere; but, when you look at the situation today, you have to ask yourself the question: was that just a political move because of the election that was in the offing.

Today, the situation is no different in Manitoba, but we have a complete lack of members of Parliament who are in the Liberal caucus from visiting the area and really getting a clear understanding of what it is. Our Minister of Agriculture (Mr. Enns) has time and time again called on the federal Minister of Agriculture to meet with him, to sit with him, to visit with him. The Minister of Agriculture arranged for a helicopter to transport the federal minister to any community he wanted to visit, to land in any field he wanted to see, to see for himself what the impact was. The federal Minister of Agriculture is a farmer himself and should understand what kind of impact this has on the economies of those communities and on those families.

Mr. Chairperson, it is just unfortunate that we have not had the opportunity to discuss this resolution, because this resolution does really lay out the fact that we have come together as the Legislature in the province of Manitoba, not as political parties, separate agendas or anything else. We have come together as the Legislature speaking with one voice to the federal government asking and expecting some results as they relate to support to the farm families in western Manitoba.

I know that our Minister of Agriculture, Mr. Enns, has indeed understood the problem. He is doing everything in his power to try and not only support the farm families out there, but to make sure that our federal counterparts understand the magnitude of this situation. Unfortunately, his voice is not being heard in Ottawa.

Mr. Chairman, I just wanted to say that, as a member elected from the western side of the province, I am committing myself to do whatever it is I can to ensure that, over the next period of 18 months or whatever it takes, we lend the kind of support to these people as we have done in other adverse situations in this province to the people of our province, so that indeed these farms can be saved, so that farmers do not have to leave their farms, so that people do not have to abandon their livelihoods and search for new ways of life, because that is not the way that this province deals with its citizens. That is not the way this government has dealt with its citizens. It is not the way that we deal with our neighbours and the people that are our friends and our neighbours in this province, so I thank you for the opportunity to be able to put some of these remarks on record.

I just wanted to say one more thing as it relates to the Assiniboine Valley Region, which is on the western side of the province. We talked about the Red River Valley and its importance. The Assiniboine Valley has undergone some tremendous stresses over the last five years. In 1995, we saw the flood of the Assiniboine Valley. In that time it was different than the Red River flood again, because there were farmers there who could not put their crops in for a period of two years. In the Red River Valley, fortunately, the farmers were able to get their crops in, all but for a few acres.

So the situations are different. The topography is different. We need to understand that there are different needs, but there are also different solutions that have to be found to address the situations that exist. Nevertheless, we have to show at least the same kind of support, the same willingness to support those families as we do in other disasters, and I do not see that from the federal government at this point in time. Through our debate, we can at least call on the federal government to become much more attentive than they have been to the issues that we have, that we are facing here in this province.

Mr. Glen Findlay (Springfield): I will speak for just a few minutes. As someone who has been involved in the process of farming in western Manitoba, a former Minister of Agriculture when we had an economic crisis, the same as now, in the whole province with low grain prices dating back to '89, '90, '91, and we worked very closely with the federal government to come up with solutions at that time. They were called GRIP and NISA. NISA is still alive, and GRIP served for a five-year period and was no longer needed.

But there is no question that there is a lot of desperation in western Manitoba right now. I dare say there are two million acres out there that are in some kind of trouble. I would suggest at least a million that will never get seeded because it is so wet, and I would suggest there are another million acres out there that have been seeded under some significant stress in terms of the crops. Muddying a crop in does not get you very good germination or a very good crop at the end of the day.

There will be the big economic impact on the farm, as other members have indicated, the lack of any income for about 18 months off productive acres normally, but there is also the economic impact that goes away beyond the farm gate. It is services not bought. It is services not used. It affects all the fertilizer dealers, your chemical dealers, your machine dealers, your hardware store, your grocery store. It will affect the ability to collect property taxes this fall. It has a broad economic long-time impact.

Reflecting on the Red River Valley, there was definitely a very serious disaster here in the spring of '97. The water rose, buildings were damaged, cropland was inundated. But, when you think back now how it unfolded, the federal and provincial governments both responded with program after program to deal with the circumstances, and the buildings were rebuilt. There was an economic boom created by the building of the buildings. The water receded in '97, and it receded also in the spring of '96 because there was a miniflood then. It receded and the land was cropped, so the economic activity of the area was back on its feet very, very quickly. In this situation, that is not going to be the case. We have been watching it unfold over the last two months, saying: well, it is wet, it will stop raining, it will dry, the crop will get in, maybe a little late.

Here we are now at the crop insurance deadlines, some passed already, and anything that has been planted in the last two weeks is under a very significant threat in terms of frost in the fall that may not amount to anything. There will be a big call on crop insurance for those people who have got crop in. There is no question about it. But we must, as a provincial government, we and Saskatchewan, work very diligently to get Ottawa to recognize this disaster and the broad implications of it that will affect not only today and tomorrow, but those communities for a long time to come.

I watched the federal government respond in various regions of the country very, very effectively, including the Red River Valley here in '97, and these people in western Manitoba need a similar consideration. Equality is great. Other members have talked about equal treatment across Canada. It is imperative we get that, and our Minister of Agriculture, I know, has been working very aggressively to try to get Ottawa to recognize we have a problem.

The federal Minister of Agriculture made a trip out here, what, about two weeks ago, sort of flew over and sort of casually noticed there was a problem. Then he made an announcement that he is coming back; it was last week, last Friday or Thursday. It gave the impression he was going to really announce something, and he did not. So further desperation sets in as nobody is worried about us. They do not care if we survive or not, and we are talking families of all shapes and descriptions out there, on farm and off farm, that are in serious trouble right now.

* (1150)

So I just want to put these few comments on the record that, unless we as responsible Canadians respond very effectively to give them some mental assurance in the next short while that there will be something down the road that gives them a chance to keep their economic engine in the whole community running, there will be great trouble out there.

I am shocked that the Liberal Leader here in Manitoba took the position today. He did not want to have this debate to protect his federal colleagues. It is shocking. It shows he does not recognize that he is trying to be a leader in Manitoba.

It causes me to remember that that member, Mr. Jon Gerrard, when he was an M.P. responsible for economic development and Western Economic Diversification, I guess it was in Manitoba, met with myself as the Minister of Transportation, the Minister of Agriculture, Mr. Enns, at the time, and with municipal leaders and with farm leaders, all of whom had decided that the Crow infrastructure money should be used for roads. Manitoba, Saskatchewan, and Alberta were all of the same opinion: use it for roads. Not a lot of money, $26 million, $27 million in Manitoba.

Mr. Gerrard came and met with us. We said: we are all onside; we want to use it for roads. He walked out of the room and had a series of meetings. He said: if we do not use it for roads, what would you use it for? And they pork barrelled. They put a lot of money into water infrastructure in the Interlake where he was going to run in the next federal election, up into Swan River into a road and other projects where a member at that time was a Liberal M.P. who lost in the next election.

This man has done some crazy things over the course of time politically as an M.P. and now as a Liberal Leader in Manitoba, but we must look beyond that and respond as a provincial government with Saskatchewan working hard with Ottawa to get a reaction. I really am pleased that we have a nonparty process here, that both opposition parties and ourselves are on track with recognizing and trying to come up with solutions that work for the betterment of the communities in a large area of Manitoba. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Ms. Wowchuk: Mr. Chairman, I realize that the Minister of Agriculture (Mr. Enns) will want to respond to these, but there are a few comments that I would just like to add. I want people to be aware that the resolution that was put forward was not a critical resolution of the federal government. It was a resolution to call people to work together. In fact, we looked at it, and we proposed, with the member for Arthur-Virden (Mr. Downey), amendments. Unfortunately, because we were denied leave to debate that resolution, it will not be on the record.

So I would really like to have permission or request that the resolution be recorded. I would like to table the resolution with the amendments that we are putting forward, and I would like to seek agreement that we would have that resolution printed in these Estimates so that the public when they look at it can realize that this was not a critical resolution. This was a resolution to pull people together to have them recognize that there is a crisis out here and there is a role for the federal government to play, just as in other areas.

So, Mr. Chairman, I would like to table the resolution, along with our amendments, and ask that it be written into the record, and if people will agree with that, I think it is very important. I think that we have to recognize that at this time it is agriculture in the western part of the province that is in crisis. It was the Red River Valley at one time. It was Quebec and the flood. One of the members mentioned the crisis on the East Coast. There is a role for the federal government. When there is a crisis, the federal government has a responsibility. They cannot wash their hands of it. Whether we have a crisis in transportation, we have a crisis in agriculture, when it is an economic crisis, there is a role for the federal government to play in it.

The members talked about the desperate situation. We have met with many of those farmers and their families, and we know that it is very desperate. They tell us that people in the city are about two pay cheques away from being broke. Farmers usually plan their activities on 12 to 18 months, when you are going to put in the crop and when you are going to take it off. But when you do not have that crop in, there is not going to be anything to come off. There is no money there, and this is putting tremendous pressure on farmers and on their families and on the whole community. I believe that it will go far beyond the western part of the province.

In the Red River Valley, there was an economic boom. Things picked up. In Quebec there was an economic boom because they had to rebuild everything. In this situation, what has to be rebuilt is the soil, and if we cannot rebuild the soil then there is a real problem.

I guess my real point is: can we put that on the record?

Mr. Enns: Mr. Chairman, allow me to express my appreciation to all members in the Chamber that participated in this short hour on this issue. Let me make it very clear, I believe it was important and helpful to senior members of the Department of Agriculture to listen to this debate. They have an understanding that as far as this Chamber is concerned, on both sides of the Chamber, there is a genuine appreciation for the concerns, if somewhat unusual. I suggest it is pity that we do not more often speak with some unanimity in this Chamber, but certainly on this very important issue there is that unanimity that was expressed by the honourable member for Swan River (Ms. Wowchuk), along with my colleagues in the Chamber.

I have no difficulty at all in the tabling of this resolution with the proviso, of course, that it is acknowledged that the member for Arthur-Virden (Mr. Downey) move the resolution, seconded by the member for Swan River, and I would ask that it so be recorded.

Mr. Chairman and colleagues, I will continue my level best with the support of staff and the staff of other departments, and as it now is apparent with the full support of Her Majesty's loyal opposition, to provide two things, equitable treatment, in the case of the farmers that are in trouble. There is that question of equitable treatment, because there was no question that specific programs were freely offered, I might say, in the '97 situation that are not being offered today. Number two, an understanding that we require the flexibility to use those funds that had been allocated for farm support. There have been just too many expressions of concern about the workings of the AIDA program, but I am and I have indicated publicly at the press conference that the federal minister was present at, the member for Swan River was present at, if that can translate into basing a payment for unseeded acreage to the level of $25 as part of our commitment to the AIDA program, then that should be done.

I really do not appreciate some of the rumours or games that are being played. I hear today, this morning, that the federal minister offered us a $25-an-acre payment. I asked the same question: when? My staff asked the same question: when? I asked him that two weeks ago Friday about whether we could, because what is missing today is some certainty. What I hear from honourable members who represent those areas or the farmers, they may not even be happy. It may not even be adequate, the amounts that governments finally choose to provide in these circumstances, but they need to have some certainly that a sum of money, a level of support, is coming, that they can take to their bank managers, to their credit union managers, to other people where they have credit, that they have some indication of some support coming.

As the member for Arthur-Virden pointed out, there are people that will be adequately covered under the AIDA program. Too many people will not covered under the AIDA program. For the region, it is a tremendous economic crisis. Quite frankly, there is a need in my judgment for significant injection of money to replace that lost money the member spoke about that is not going to be recovered for at least 18 months.

So members, I thank you very much for this contribution. Mr. Chairman, I thank you for your indulgence in this latitude that we have used in the consideration for the departments of Estimates, but I want to tell you it is far more important to talk about this issue than worry about how many pencils or paperclips my staff have used or not used effectively in the last years or propose to use in these Estimates. This is by far the most important issue facing agriculture, and I am delighted that we have had this opportunity to discuss it. Thank you.

Mr. Chairperson: The hour being twelve o'clock, committee rise. Call in the Speaker.

Mr. Deputy Speaker (Marcel Laurendeau): The hour being twelve o'clock, I am leaving the Chair with the understanding that the Speaker will resume the Chair at 1:30 p.m.