Yes. Thank you, Chair, and thank you, members of the agriculture committee.
I'm the critic for the trade committee. This issue has been coming up from a variety of groups that are concerned about the credibility of the government as it negotiates trade deals, works with all the different interests and groups here in Canada, and makes settlements with them as it proceeds on with the trade deals. For example, in the TPP, in order to get their buy-in on supply management, the government actually agreed to a compensation package beforehand, before we signed on to it. That hasn't been forthcoming.
We did try to do things the appropriate way. We did send a letter to the minister three weeks ago, asking for her response, to pay attention to this, to focus on it—not even a reply. That's very unfortunate. I'm sorry, but that's not an excuse.
Now I have a scenario in the wine sector where we have wine growers who are really nervous right now because of trade action that's happened because of an escalator on the excise tax. They have an agreement in place that gives them two years, but they're seeing what's going on in the supply management sector and others, the groups outside of dairy, and they're saying, “Well, can we trust them? If they don't keep their word with what was created in TPP with the supply management sector, how can we trust them to keep their word over the next few years in the wine sector?” There's some credibility at stake here, and some nervousness on top of COVID and everything else that's going on.
The trade committee, it's tough for us to meet. We don't have the ability to do Zoom meetings. We actually have to go, in person, to Ottawa to do these meetings. I'm glad John and you guys in the ag committee are considering this. It's very important that we deal with this. There are lots of farms here that could really use that support and that knowledge and the comfort in knowing that when they do agree to something, the government will actually follow through.
I'm looking at the motion—