AGRI Committee Meeting

STANDING COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE AND AGRI-FOOD

COMITÉ PERMANENT DE L'AGRICULTURE ET DE L'AGROALIMENTAIRE

EVIDENCE

[Recorded by Electronic Apparatus]

Thursday, March 12, 1998

• 0913

[English]

The Chairman (Mr. Joe McGuire (Egmont, Lib.): Good morning, everyone. I call the meeting to order; we have one Liberal here.

I'm sorry we're late getting started. Mr. Chrétien usually keeps us on our toes here, at 9 a.m. sharp, but he's been slack this morning. We'll blame it on him.

Pursuant to Standing Order 108(2), we will have today an information session with the Canadian Agriculture Lifetime Leadership program, or CALL.

I want to welcome you to the regular session of the Standing Committee on Agriculture and Agri-Food. Most of us met your group yesterday at the session we had, and at the reception.

Do you have a short presentation, Terry?

Mr. Terry Murray (Chairman, Canadian Farm Business Management Council): Yes, I do, Mr. Chairman.

The Chairman: Okay. After you give that presentation we'll go to questions.

Mr. Terry Murray: Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.

Please let me have the liberty of introducing some of the CALL participants who decided to join us this morning: Pauline Duivenvoorden, from Newfoundland; Vic Bruce, from Saskatchewan; Conrad Toner, from New Brunswick; Sharon Moulder, from British Columbia; and Grant Fotheringham, from Manitoba.

The Chairman: If you want to bring them to the table, you can do so.

Mr. Terry Murray: If they could come up here, maybe they would get involved and get a real feel for the process. We'd be honoured to have them come forward, thanks.

[Translation]

Mr. Jean-Guy Chrétien (Frontenac—Mégantic, BQ): There is room.

[English]

Some hon. members: Oh, oh.

Mr. Murray Calder (Dufferin—Peel—Wellington—Grey, Lib.): Tell him to be nice.

Mr. Terry Murray: I also have to mention my executive director from the council, Dorothy Middleton, and another director from Agriculture and Agri-food Canada, Jeff Wardrop, who are here to take part in this exercise, to broaden and strengthen our understanding of some of the processes.

As chairman of the Canadian Farm Business Management Council, I welcome the opportunity to brief you on the council and to provide you with an overview of the initiative CFBMC has overtaken. Of course, that's the Canadian Agriculture Lifetime Leadership program, commonly known now, and becoming more known, as CALL.

We have with us also Scott McLean, our program coordinator. He's a professor at the University of Saskatchewan and a valued member of this process.

The Canadian Farm Business Management Council was established in 1992 with a mission to engage in national activities that lead to an improvement in the management of individual farm businesses in Canada through greater use of effective decision-making and farm business management practices.

• 0915

Some of our activities of course include those areas of identifying the national needs and responding to national needs, coordination of existing programs and sharing of information among various jurisdictions in Canada, communicating that information on various elements of farm business management to stakeholders, developing national programs and initiatives, and providing guidance to our provincial counterparts. Our clients are not only farmers and farm management, of course, but the processors and suppliers, and indeed an overall context of what that industry represents in agriculture.

By developing pertinent tools and giving this type of up-to-date information, we feel we provide some leading-edge tools for Canadian agriculture. By assimilation of that knowledge, of course, we hope and are confident there will be an ever-increasing role in competition in the global marketplace.

Not only do we help farmers but we feel we are supportive of agricultural organizations and ultimately the agriculture and agrifood industry in Canada coast to coast. This mandate is one of our greatest challenges but also one of our greatest strengths.

Bringing the industry and government together to identify key management issues in agriculture is fundamental for CFBMC. Comprised of both farm managers and provincial government representatives from each province, plus two representatives from Agriculture and Agri-Food, we consider our board of directors to be a model for government-industry partnerships. It must be pointed out that in each province there are PCGs that have the opportunity to put those two people forth, but within that provincial coordinating group there's a mix of farmers and industry people from a variety of sectors in each province, and indeed across Canada. In doing that we attempt to share and coordinate information and raise, as we've heard about here, the bar of expectations for our whole industry.

We just finished a summit on risk management. Three or four weeks ago we brought together here in Toronto people from the private sector and from organizations and from government to get a better understanding of risk management. We categorize it as a systems approach to risk management, not just a matter of identifying the individual tools, although they are important.

I suggest there are three levels of risk management for Canadian agriculture, one at the primary and production level, one on the regulatory layer, and then public policy-making at a higher level. There has to be an understanding by Canadian agriculture to recognize where each of these disciplines fits, where each player fits, and what influence they would have. That's an example of this idea of sharing and coordination of information.

Another area is the adaptation and distribution of information. We have a long-standing Web site out there. It's well recognized. It's called the FBMInet. In a sense it's a gateway as well.

The council itself now has what we call another gateway. It goes into some other areas. It gives us an opportunity to link with...there are some 1,800 links across Canada or around the world. People can access into and out of our system to get various levels of information and knowledge.

You try to provide that information and hope it's in a timely and current enough manner that it does have a true influence. That's another challenge to us: to keep it current.

I took the opportunity to background you just briefly, but we're truly here to go over the Canadian Agriculture Lifetime Leadership program, which is sponsored by the CFBMC, coordinated by the University of Saskatchewan, and directed by a national steering committee.

The CALL seeks to develop leadership skills in 30 people in the agricultural industry across Canada. On completion of this program we expect a win-win result. We have 16 men and 14 women who will not only learn a number of skills beneficial to themselves personally but will also have been equipped to turn around and contribute back to Canadian agriculture and Canadian society in general. This contribution takes the form of leadership—leadership in Canadian agriculture.

It's a concept that may not seem obvious at first, but we often talk about the value of leadership in the political arena or in big business or indeed professional sports, so what about agriculture? Indeed, what about agriculture and the agrifood industry, which accounts for 1.9 million jobs—15% of all employment in Canada—and which is responsible for $21 billion of Canada's export market? There's truly a need for leadership at all levels within that process.

• 0920

We're always subject to global trade influences and rapidly changing technologies, as well as government and self-regulation, and yet the industry lives and thrives in every province from coast to coast. The influence that agriculture has in our society is tremendous.

Given the scope and value of the complexities and influences that dominate agriculture and agrifood, it's more critical than ever to cultivate the champions we need to lead us into the 21st century.

The key to this success is a national program now called CALL. While the agricultural leadership programs of this nature are quite common at the local level and indeed at the provincial level, CALL is a national program with participants from every province taking part in seminars across Canada and internationally.

The word “excellence” and Canadian agriculture often go hand in hand, and some of the responsibility for this lies in the attention and consideration that our political leaders have given over many years to the value of the agriculture and agrifood industry in Canada. There's no reason we cannot continue to maintain and build upon this standard, lifting our sights and using a creative and innovative approach.

The CALL program is an example of what the Canadian Farm Business Management Council can do in this regard, through the funding it receives from Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada. By sponsoring a program that helps develop stronger leaders for the industry, we have kick-started a series of benefits into motion that will continue to move along, even accelerate, as we pass the CALL participants through the graduation of this program.

If government's role is to create opportunities and to be a catalyst for growth, then the CALL program and indeed the Canadian Farm Business Management Council are ideal examples of good investment by government.

Ultimately all of us at the Canadian Farm Business Management Council are guided by the vision of public dollars for public good. If, by sponsoring a program, we feel it's certain the taxpayer will get not only value but also good return on their investment, we're pleased to act as a partner in this program. CALL is this program, on which we look forward to receiving a truly excellent return.

By way of a sidebar to this, Dr. George Brinkman did a study of the Ontario advanced leadership program, and it was clearly outlined in there that there was a twenty to one return.

For more information on the specifics of the program, I'll turn it over to Scott McLean from the University of Saskatchewan.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Mr. Scott McLean (Manager, Canadian Agriculture Lifetime Leadership Program, University of Saskatchewan Extension Division): Thank you, Mr. Chairperson. I'd just like to thank Terry for giving us some of the background and rationale for the CALL program. I won't take much more time. I imagine the members of the standing committee will have some questions for us, and I understand that will be a more useful use of the meeting time this morning.

I'd just like to underline a couple of things. First of all, while this may seem like a new concept to many of the folks around this table, this model of leadership development in the agriculture industry is in fact well proven, with a track record in over half of the states in the United States of America. Since the 1960s, in a number of states they have been using a model of leadership development that is similar to what we're employing in the CALL program.

Terry has outlined some of the objectives and rationales for the program. I just want to outline that the outcomes we're anticipating from this program span a range of individual, community, and industry objectives.

The individuals who are in the program will benefit from expanded knowledge, improved skills, enlarged personal networks, increased self-confidence, and broadened awareness of agricultural issues. These benefits, however, are not localized just to the participants. We would suggest that the Canadian agrifood industry will also benefit from the contributions made by graduates of the CALL program.

We'd suggest the industry will be strengthened by graduates' leadership roles with regional, provincial, and national agrifood organizations; by graduates' leadership roles in developing new agrifood businesses and enhancing existing businesses; through graduates' advocacy efforts on behalf of Canadian agriculture, both within Canada and internationally; through graduates' impact as educators, mentors, and role models on improving production and farm business management practices across Canada; and finally, by graduates' abilities to promote collaboration between diverse sectors and regions in the Canadian agrifood industry.

• 0925

I'll just say a few words about the process of the CALL program in terms of how we're going about developing leadership abilities among our participants. We really have a three-pronged approach to the development of leaders for the industry.

First, we are endeavouring to broaden their horizons of knowledge, promoting an advanced understanding of the agrifood industry and leadership. We are also looking at specific issues—globalization, biotechnology, education, public awareness, public policy, marketing, and finance issues.

The second emphasis in the program is to help these leadership students practice the art of leadership. We believe becoming an effective leader involves having the opportunity to practice leadership skills and behaviours. Throughout the program, participants are applying the art of leadership in their activities. We're working on such skills as communications, working with groups, and analysing issues.

The third emphasis of the program in terms of how we're going about developing the leadership for the industry is to help build effective networks. The CALL program itself creates a network of leaders, linking the diverse sectors and regions of the Canadian agrifood industry. In addition to the strong relationships being forged between the participants, each participant will expand his or her personal networks through interacting with leaders and resource people from across Canada, the United States, and Mexico.

The program is delivered through a number of different strategies. The first is in-person seminars, one of which was yesterday, when we had the great pleasure to meet with many of the members of the standing committee as part of our two-week study-travel seminar concerning the theme of politics in agricultural organizations.

In addition to these leadership seminars, the participants in the program are linked together over the Internet through a common server using computer-mediated conferencing software. Throughout the 18 to 20 months of the program, these 30 leaders are interacting with one another, working on group projects, and building their understanding and awareness of issues from across the country through a computer-mediated conference.

I'd like to thank you all for your attention this morning. We'd be pleased to respond to any questions you might have.

The Chairman: Thank you both very much.

I was wondering, how are the participants selected? How did you select Conrad Toner, for example?

Mr. Scott McLean: The selection process was something about which we took great care. There was initially a public awareness and recruitment campaign that was handled across the country. There was a two-stage process.

Mr. Murray referred to provincial counterpart groups of the Canadian Farm Business Management Council. Within each province, a chair was chosen for a selection committee. That chairperson came from a provincial counterpart group to the Canadian Farm Business Management Council.

They formed a committee based on representatives from different sectors of the industry within their province. An application form was distributed across the country. Applicants applied to their provincial recruitment committees. They were interviewed based on a number of criteria. They had to be involved in the agricultural industry. They had to demonstrate some past experience and abilities in leadership. They had to demonstrate an awareness of current issues facing the industry, and demonstrate that they had the ability to provide some good analysis and understanding of those issues.

After the interview process, nominations were forwarded by each of the 10 provincial committees to a national selection committee, who had a look at, using the same criteria as the provincial committees had, selecting the 30 participants to the program.

In addition to the actual criteria used, we had at the national level the responsibility of trying to look at the people we brought into the program so that there was a balance—that is, so that they reflected the sectoral, regional and industry-related aspects of the industry. For example, we wanted to ensure that all of the main commodities we produce in Canada had representation within the program.

The Chairman: Okay.

We should go to questions, then, beginning with Mr. Casson.

Mr. Rick Casson (Lethbridge, Ref.): Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Do you feel, then, you have a pretty good cross-section of the agricultural industry represented by these 30 people, from all sectors—livestock, grain, the whole business?

Mr. Scott McLean: Yes, sir. I understand our brochure may be available, although I'm not sure if it's been distributed yet to all the members. If you'll take the time to look at the biographies of the individuals in the program you'll see that in fact all of the major industries are represented.

Within the program, about two-thirds of our participants are primary producers. When you look at the producers, everything—dairy, hogs, cattle, grains, oilseeds, fruits and vegetables, poultry. You can go down the list. You will see potatoes, for example, and you can see that we do have a good representation of the industry.

• 0930

Mr. Rick Casson: How long a program is this? When do they graduate?

Mr. Scott McLean: The program began in September 1997 and they will graduate in March 1999, so we're looking at about 18 months.

Mr. Rick Casson: And the cost. How's the cost borne? Where does the money come from?

Mr. Scott McLean: The overall budget for the program is $721,000. Of that cost, the direct participants pay $150,000, that is, they pay $5,000 apiece. The Canadian Farm Business Management Council has provided a grant, through Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada, of $381,000. Industry contributions, that is, fundraising from the private sector, accounts for $70,000, and the remaining $120,000, I believe, is in-kind support from the Farm Business Management Council and the University of Saskatchewan.

Mr. Rick Casson: Do you feel that when these people graduate they're going to be able to be in the private sector industry or are they going to be on the government side of agriculture? Or is it a mix? What kind of people are you preparing there?

Mr. Scott McLean: By and large, I would suggest to you that the participants would be more involved in the private sector than in the government sector. Within the program we do not have an emphasis on preparing civil servants, but that being said, I think we do recognize that government has a role to play in agriculture in Canada and that we're preparing leaders who will be able to interact with actors who are active in the government realm. But by and large, I would suggest—and Terry may have some comments with regard to that question—that most of our people would place an emphasis on the private sector.

Mr. Terry Murray: Yes, indeed. And the private sector would be the private sector that includes not only farming but the related industries.

But I think the influence that they will have in interacting with the bureaucrats or the civil servants of our governments, both provincially and municipally, goes even down that far. I think that influence maybe will start there. And certainly at the national level, it has a pertinent relationship as well.

The Chairman: Mr. Chrétien.

[Translation]

Mr. Jean-Guy Chrétien: I would like to welcome you both and thank you for your presentation. I wish to apologize for my colleagues from the government party, of whom only two members out of eight are here this morning. I hope that this is not due to a lack of interest in your program which I find very interesting. I trust that all parties are of the same view. Anyway, the four opposition parties are well represented.

Under the objectives of the CALL Program, it is said at the end of the first paragraph that the program is paid for and supported by Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada, through the CFBMC. Having read that paragraph, I thought that the program was entirely paid for by the Department of Agriculture and Agri-Food.

However, it says further on that each participant has to contribute $5,000 to the program. Then, a bit further on, comes the list of important funding sources. There is the Royal Bank, the Canadian Charolais Association, the Devon Club, the Manitoba Pool Elevators, the Coopérative fédérée du Québec and so on.

Could you tell me in what proportion those companies contribute to the funding of the program? In fact, you only need to tell me how much money comes from Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada.

Mr. Scott McLean: As I just said in English, the Department of Agriculture and Agri-Food gave us a $381,000 grant.

Mr. Jean-Guy Chrétien: $381,000.

Mr. Scott McLean: Yes.

Mr. Jean-Guy Chrétien: Out of an overall budget of...?

Mr. Scott McLean: Of $721,000.

Mr. Jean-Guy Chrétien: Therefore, their share is around 40 or 45%. That's good. I thought that the funding and the support were... I would have come to the conclusion, had I not read further on, that the financing was 100% due to the generosity of the Department.

• 0935

Are your 30 participants full-time? There was some question of a diploma in a conversation that I had earlier with my colleague from the Reform Party. Are they full-time? Will they get credits? Will there be a real diploma, a certificate of merit which will be recognized by the industry or by universities?

Mr. Scott McLean: I can tell you that they are not full-time students, like those in universities for example. They take part in a leadership development program. They all have a career as farm producers or business people in the agri-food industry. They are not full-time students because we would not want to ask people to abandon their career to participate in the Canadian Agriculture Lifetime Leadership Program.

Mr. Jean-Guy Chrétien: Therefore, these aren't people who have been freed from their professional obligations or who are on leave without pay.

Mr. Scott McLean: Exactly. I would say that in two years they will devote about 50 days to the program, like those two weeks they spent on the seminar on politics and agriculture organizations. We asked them to spend two weeks with us. Altogether, they will devote more than 50 days to the program.

Between those seminars, which are held in specific places, there is, like I said in English, a course on the Internet, which requires between three and five hours of work per week from the participants.

After the leadership program, the participants will be granted a certificate from the University of Saskatchewan. Actually, we anticipate that this certificate will be considered an asset by the industry in the future.

Mr. Jean-Guy Chrétien: This will look good on a résumé.

Mr. Scott McLean: Absolutely.

Mr. Jean-Guy Chrétien: That being said, I truly appreciated what Mr. Murray told me—if my memory serves me right, it was Mr. Murray—, that is that both sexes are well represented. There are 16 men and 14 women in the program. It's fantastic.

Your booklet is also very well done: it contains photographs, notes on personal stories and so forth. I was disappointed however to note the lack of representation from the province of Quebec. I counted only three participants: Sylvie Mahannah, Ernest Desrosiers and Marie Bouillé. Unless I'm wrong, I counted only three out of 30, that is 10%, while agricultural economic activity in the province of Quebec accounts for 23 or 24%.

How do you explain that? Is it due to a lack of research? Was the advertising not sufficient in Quebec? Or is it due to a lack of interest for your organization on the part of Quebeckers?

Mr. Scott McLean: Indeed, there are two women and one man from the province of Quebec who are registered in our program. You're right.

We were a bit disappointed with the results of the selection process in Quebec because we did not succeed in arousing as much interest in that province as elsewhere in Canada. But one must not forget that the language of work in the program is English. This probably created difficulties for Quebec producers.

I would add that the Canadian Farm Business Management Council also sponsored a feasibility study for the implementation of a program in French, a Canadian Agriculture Lifetime Leadership Program for the francophone community.

Mr. Jean-Guy Chrétien: Let me repeat. Do you mean that in this program, the language of work is English exclusively and that a unilingual francophone would not be able to participate? Have I understood well?

Mr. Scott McLean: Yes. The program is given in English of course.

Mr. Jean-Guy Chrétien: And if I don't speak English well enough, I won't be able to enroll.

Mr. Scott McLean: It would be an additional challenge for those who only speak French.

Mr. Jean-Guy Chrétien: Mr. Chairman, you will rule me out of order but if 40 or 45% of the costs of the program are paid for by Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada, it is totally unacceptable that it is intended only for bilingual people or unilingual anglophones.

• 0940

Mr. Scott McLean: It is a pilot project having among other objectives to inform us on how to organize such a program for people who speak only French.

But I have to add that the Canadian Farm Business Management Council decided to prepare a program resembling the Canadian Agriculture Lifetime Leadership program which will be offered in French only. Therefore, instead of having a single program for people who feel at ease working in two languages, English and French, there will be two programs which will be equal and which will have similar objectives.

Mr. Jean-Guy Chrétien: When will you implement the second program in French?

Mr. Scott McLean: I will ask Terry to answer that question.

[English]

The Chairman: We'll have to go to Mr. Calder after this answer.

Mr. Terry Murray: Thanks very much.

As the minister announced last night at the reception, we indeed approved yesterday a funding process to put in place a national CALL program for the francophone community across Canada. I think that's going to be in place by 1999. We figure we'll have all the bumps worked out of the process by then. We're very pleased to be able to announce that today again, as stated last night by the minister. So that's well on its way.

Scott McLean was absolutely right: as a pilot, in order to do something for the first time on a national level such as this, we had to find a way to test it, in a sense, with the full expectation of introducing a national CALL program for francophone Canadians. We've lived up to the mandate and challenge we'd put upon ourselves. We're very pleased.

The Chairman: Mr. Calder.

Mr. Murray Calder: Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.

I'll follow up a wee bit on that, and then I have some other questions. If you put together a national program for francophones, they're still going to have to be bilingual, because the areas in which you're going to be are predominantly English-speaking anyway, right? Am I right in that assumption?

Mr. Scott McLean: I would suggest that you may or may not be correct, because the program for the francophone community has been based on a feasibility study, a study of needs assessment, for the francophone community in Canada. The results of that study will direct the planning of that program, which may or may not mirror in precise terms the CALL program.

So it's a good observation, but it's not necessarily the case. The structure of the program will be slightly different because it was based on research done with the francophone communities.

Mr. Murray Calder: Okay. Because I would see a problem with that. If the francophone was not bilingual, which they basically would have to be, your program would have to be constricted to an area that just speaks French. Quite frankly, on the North American continent, that's Quebec—with outlying areas in Canada, because we are bilingual. When you get into the United States, unless you're going to go down into the very southern part of the United States, I can't think of any examples where that exists, unless you're going to France.

Would I be right in that assumption?

The Chairman: I think, Mr. Calder, New Brunswick is officially a bilingual province.

Mr. Murray Calder: I said across Canada.

The Chairman: Nova Scotia has a significant francophone population.

Mr. Murray Calder: I said across Canada. Once you get into the United States, which is where this program goes also, because you want an overview of North America, you're running into that. But I don't want to belabour that.

I read through the program here and divided it into three baskets—“what?”, “what for?”, and “what now?” I understand the program. It's a very good program. I also understand what you're doing it for. I want to deal with the “what now?”

After the program is done, does everybody go home? What happens after the program is done?

Mr. Terry Murray: I would suggest that once you get a taste for this, you never can go just back home. I truly believe this.

I guess I have to go back in history, 25 years ago. You may find this trite, but it was personal to me. There was a program, a pilot, in Alberta that failed to continue. I was too young at that time to take advantage of it, and it irked me so much that I really, truly became a champion for this type of initiative across Canada. The opportunities we lost out on by not continuing that program in Alberta at that time was unprecedented.

• 0945

We had some tremendous outcomes from those candidates who went into that program 25 or 30 years ago. We didn't see the benefits until 10 or 15 years, maybe, but they steadily rose. The candidates had influence within commodity organizations, within general farm organizations and within the private sector, and they continue to this day to have that influence and take that responsibility.

While they may have gone home for a short period of time, they were slowly getting involved in politics—local, municipal, provincial, regional. Indeed, now some of them are on the national stage. If we had kept that process going for what it was meant to be, as Ontario has done and as New Brunswick is doing now, you would have ended up with that benefit.

No, they do not stay at home.

Mr. Scott McLean: Mr. Calder, there are really three things I would like to mention. Your question, “What's going to happen after this program?”, is an excellent one.

To start off, the structure of the program will lead all of these 30 leaders to a personal visioning process of personal commitments they will make, by the end of the program, to take leadership roles with the industry. At our final seminar in Kananaskis we will have each of them present their own personal plan of action with regard to what they will do for the industry.

The second thing I'd like to say is that there will be an alumni group. Part of the power of the CALL program is the networking component of bringing together people who represent different sectors of the industry in different regions. So the alumni group and networking within the group will continue.

Third, we will be monitoring, in an ongoing way, the leadership activities of the group. I mentioned at the start of my own presentation that the model we're using here for developing leaders for agriculture in Canada has been tested in the United States. They have data from well over 20 states following the activities of graduates from their programs over time. They've come up with really quite a convincing case for the assertion that these programs actually do lead to individuals who have a commitment to taking on leadership roles and making a difference for their industry.

So we will monitor the activities of our graduates, and we anticipate, as has been the case in the American programs, that they will engage in more and more responsible positions of leadership for the industry.

Mr. Murray Calder: That's good, because in the literature I read through here I couldn't find anything that formally was going to plug these individuals, once they've gone through this course and assimilated through it knowledge and expertise, into where they would be useful, into the agriculture industry. That's great.

Thanks, Mr. Chairman.

The Chairman: Thank you. Mr. Proctor.

Mr. Dick Proctor (Palliser, NDP): Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

I want to shift the focus a little bit, if I might, and ask the students, who are in front of microphones, what they might have learned in their travels today.

I note from your schedules that you've been in Albany and Washington and Montreal and Ottawa. Yesterday you heard from us where the various parties were coming from, and some of our concerns about the future.

What have you learned, for example, on the World Trade Organization, on biotechnology, and on how far ahead or behind you think the Americans are as we all get ready for the next round of WTO? Have your views changed significantly as a result of what you've heard today?

I'd be interested in some impressions from any of you at the table or from anybody who would like to come up and share their thoughts.

Ms. Wendy Bullouch (Canadian Agriculture Lifetime Leadership Student): I'll start first, if that's okay. I'm Wendy Bullouch, and I'm from Manitoba.

Mr. Calder, you asked what we would be doing when we go back. We will never be the same. What we have been exposed to is extraordinary. The learning opportunities we've had thus far, since last September, have been extraordinary.

We have been in Saskatoon on leadership presentations, learning about leadership, getting a good understanding of leadership and the importance of leadership, learning that leadership doesn't necessarily always mean being in the lead; sometimes it's being a follower.

• 0950

The other thing we've learned is the importance of giving back to our communities. I came into this program with that intention, and I intend to go home with it. But I also know when I go back to Manitoba on Sunday, I'll be going back a very different person from when I flew out of Montreal almost two weeks ago.

One of the biggest things we need to be aware of is how strong and how ready we are for the WTO. We spent a few days in Washington. They are going to eat us up if we are not ready.

The other thing we need to realize is the whole issue of the global attitude, because we have to be able to handle globalization. If we're not, we're going to lose.

Another thing we need to really realize is that this is a very strong group. There are 30 of us. I feel bad some days for Scott having to lead us, because we're very challenging and we're very independent people. But we also still have a common denominator, and that is our love for, our belief in, and our commitment to the agricultural industry.

That whole industry in itself, having 30 of us, will be much stronger, because we now have networks and contacts in every province across Canada. So whether I'm in the centre of Canada or whether Sylvie, who's from Quebec, or Pauline, who's from Newfoundland, or the fellows out in B.C..... That is a connection we will never lose and that we will be able to make very good use of in the coming years. I really feel that as a group, that's where we're going to be going.

So those are just a few—and I'm saying a very few—of the things of the things that have impacted upon me.

Ms. Sharon Moulder (Canadian Agriculture Lifetime Leadership Student): Sharon Moulder, British Columbia.

These last two weeks have just been phenomenal, when I sit down and start to try to think of everything we've been exposed to. “Being exposed to” and “being able to experience” are key words for me, because in order to go into the WTO, we'll have to know what the United States and Europe are thinking, but still more important, we're going to have to know what this country is thinking.

We have some great divisions in this country based on regional issues, and that goes back to commodities that are based on regional issues. So not only is there an international need to get organized; there's a real need in this country to get organized as to where we're going to be.

I don't now how else we would have gotten the kind of exposure we did in these last two weeks. It was just phenomenal. Many of us have said we have changes of clothes, but we need an extra brain in our suitcase to change that so it can be filled up again, because we've just been exposed to so much. As Wendy says, we'll go home different people. There's no doubt about it.

The Chairman: Mr. Borotsik.

Mr. Rick Borotsik (Brandon—Souris, PC): I'd like to continue on. In fact Dick looked at my notes again.

Wendy Bullouch from Manitoba just joined us after the introduction, so once again, thank you, Wendy, for being here, and Grant.

When we were walking up to the committee we were talking about the preparedness and the readiness of the Americans particularly with respect to the WTO negotiations. I should say to the group—Scott, Terry, and the other members of the CALL program—what you saw yesterday in committee is not the preparedness and readiness of the Canadian negotiators. We have heard and we do hear on a regular basis.... The Canadian negotiators sit before us and they do tell us their positions, and they are professionals. I want you to know that.

What you saw yesterday is not what you're going to get at the negotiating table, so rest assured it's not the politicians who are going to screw this up, okay? We do have professional people to take our positions before the WTO.

However, in saying that, the direction comes from the politicians, and I do have concern. I tried to stress it yesterday. The first priority from our perspective is the international trade and how well prepared we are going to those tables, because that's where the future of agriculture in Canada lies.

What I'd like to hear, perhaps from the other members of the organization, is this. You were in the United States. You were in Washington. You talked to the people who are going to be across the table. I would like to hear from you what you honestly believe is their strength in going to the World Trade Organization, what they put forward to you. I appreciate you didn't get into the nuts and bolts of it, but you have an impression. I want to hear your impression as to what they are going to bring to the table, because quite frankly I'm scared. I heard yesterday our strategy and our plan is to not have a plan and go there and negotiate when we get there. That's not the way to do it. I'd like to hear your impressions as to what the Americans are doing.

Mr. Vic Bruce (Canadian Agriculture Lifetime Leadership Student): I'm Vic Bruce from Saskatchewan. I'll make a couple of short points.

• 0955

From an American point of view, free trade is an oxymoron. It's total and unrestricted access to every market in the world: I don't care what's in it for the other person; it's what's in it for me.

If you're going to play with a giant, we have to have some rules, because we can't win. They'll attack it from every different direction they can. They're there to win. And we have to trade. That was quite apparent. But we have to have some rules, because we're the small player.

I guess maybe that picture is worth a thousand words. I think that's what this program is giving me. I'm sort of indirectly answering the question.

There was a sense of awe when I hit Washington for the first time, but I tell you it wasn't near the impression of my coming up on the Hill for the first time, which was yesterday. There was a smell of power there, but there is a smell of belonging here. I can't put it in any stronger words than that.

Maybe I'll just quit there and let Grant take over.

Mr. Grant Fotheringham (Canadian Agriculture Lifetime Leadership Student): Grant Fotheringham, from Manitoba.

I think we have to realize the power of the American lobby. If we're going to succeed, I think this is where we'll succeed. They are divided themselves, the lobby, in their issues, whether they be the sugar producers against the wheat farmers and the durum growers.... They still don't have a unified position.

I think if we can get ahead of them by doing that, by our people listening to the views of the farm community, whether it be the Wheat Board issue or the stabilized markets, if we can get a strong union developed among our own groups, then I think we have a chance against these people.

Mr. Rick Borotsik: Mr. Chairman, I just want to allay some of the fears of the group. We do have some very good people. By the way, a comment was made at this very table a couple of weeks ago that we have to have a rules-based system, because we, the smaller player in this whole thing, have to play by the rules. Even with rules, Americans don't play by the rules, but at least then we've got an opportunity of following the rules and having an appeal process of those rules. We've been very successful at that. Believe me, there are good people out there negotiating on our behalf. What we have to do is make sure that they continue that progress and they continue that step.

One other thing: I see your seminars, but I don't see Brandon listed in the seminars—or Quebec. I'll help Jean-Guy on this one. I don't see Quebec and I don't see Brandon. So perhaps we can fit those in in the next program, Scott, when we try to put the seminars together for plan two.

[Translation]

Mr. Scott McLean: We had three days in Montreal.

[English]

We didn't put Brandon on. I think it's a travesty that we're not going to Manitoba, but we did go to Montreal and the Montreal region for three days. But it is true, we didn't make it into Manitoba.

I believe the alumni group is planning its inaugural meeting in Brandon, Manitoba, though, in the summer of 1999.

[Translation]

Mr. Rick Borotsik: Thank you very much sir. Your French is quite good.

The Chairman: Mr. Coderre.

Mr. Denis Coderre (Bourassa, Lib.): I would like to apologize for the impertinent remarks of my separatist colleague this morning. He took the attendance today, but I did yesterday. We noticed that he was absent. Unfortunately, it was probably for one of two reasons: either he was not interested or he doesn't know enough about agriculture.

I don't know if I should be talking to you this morning as a member of the Committee on Agriculture or as vice-chairman of the Joint Committee on Official Languages. Take a good look at me. I am a member of the Liberal Party of Canada and therefore a federalist. However, one may have grievances even if one wants to keep our country united.

Mr. Murray, when I look at the Canadian program which you are presenting to us, I find that it is an extraordinary idea. I think that this program will allow us to create relationships and maybe avoid making mistakes during negotiations, because relationships will have been established between the producers and the agricultural leaders of Mexico, the United States and Canada.

However, as a member of this Committee and as vice-chairman of the Joint Committee on Official Languages, I must tell you that I am extremely disappointed this morning to see that a good idea is being set aside by reason of insensitivity. I don't want a French program and an English program. I want a bilingual program that a francophone and an anglophone can have access to.

• 1000

We know that it is paid for by public funds and that 25% of the Canadian population is French-speaking. Quebec is not the only province where francophones live. There are some in Ontario, in New-Brunswick, in Saskatchewan and in Manitoba, especially in Saint-Boniface. I will be in Winnipeg Monday and Tuesday. One thing is certain, Mr. Chairman, I am outraged by the insensitivity of such a program to the Canadian reality.

Mr. Murray, I am under the obligation to complain to the Commissioner of Official Languages so that in the future your programs take into consideration the French fact in Canada.

We have extraordinary producers in Canada who are French- speaking. I won't elaborate on the subject, but I hope that next time there won't be a problem and that I won't be obliged as a member of the Committee on Agriculture to use such language.

[English]

The Chairman: Any further questions?

[Translation]

Mr. Denis Coderre: If you listened better, you could be more realistic.

I would like to know what you did in Montreal, in French or in English.

Mr. Scott McLean: First, as I said, it is a pilot project. Our long term vision is to have a program for the francophones as well as for the anglophones. We held a seminar in Montreal from February the 28th to March the 2nd. We had speakers who made their presentations in French and we had interpreters for them.

Most questions were asked in English because most people were English-speaking. We managed anyhow in Montreal with francophone resource persons and things worked out well. I think that people in the rest of Canada appreciate what they learned in Montreal, Saint-Valérien, Sainte-Anne-des-Plaines and other communities that we visited.

I agree with you: it is indeed a program which should help establish relationships between anglophone and francophone Canadian producers. We certainly intend to contribute to the creation of long term relationships. However, the pilot project was to carry the program. We have not succeeded in facing up to the challenge you're talking about but I can assure you that we intend to do so in the long run.

Mr. Denis Coderre: Mr. McLean, my name is Denis Coderre. If you need extra money, as a member of Parliament, I'm willing to put enough pressure so that you can have it. I'm not asking an anglophone to speak French. I want a francophone, like an anglophone, to have access to this program in his or her mother tongue. If you need more money for simultaneous translation... This morning, we're talking in both languages. Mr. Murray has his little device and we understand each other. This is what I want. I donÂt want an extraordinary idea to be set aside as a matter of principle, for such important reasons. Thank you.

[English]

The Chairman: Mr. Murray, your final word.

Mr. Terry Murray: Thank you.

To bring this around and look at it for its long-term benefits to Canadian agriculture, I would dearly like to say that the inclusion and the building of both of these programs and the crossover down the road and the influence this will have on Canadian agriculture by having this understanding and this dialogue take place is far more important in the long term than a 30-second sound bite. We have to get past this and get into a reality that says we have francophones in this country from coast to coast. We have people who have French as a first or second language. We have that opportunity to amalgamate them into it. We have more than 2,000 English-speaking farmers in Quebec who we would like to include and have part of the bigger picture as well. This is a long-term initiative for that harmonization and understanding for both French and Canadian.

• 1005

I'm in the dairy industry personally as a dairy farmer, and I understand full well the interrelationship we've had in a national plan with the Canadian Dairy Commission and the influences in Quebec and outside of that. That didn't happen overnight, sir. It takes time to build and establish enough trust for this to take place. The fact that we are in Quebec with our stop-off in Montreal is a true example of this. The exposure of francophones and English-speaking farmers to each other is an initial step and a primary step in getting over this and getting past this.

Maybe we can't fix things in two steps; we might take ten steps. But please be assured that we work with that vision in mind for Canadian agriculture, not just for one or the other.

Thank you.

The Chairman: Thank you people very much for coming in this morning and for your meeting yesterday. Good luck in your future. Maybe your CALL program will become more of a permanent exercise. Thank you all again.

We'll recess for five minutes and we'll go into a steering committee in camera in five minutes. We're adjourned.