moved:
Motion No. 3
That Bill C-34, in Clause 9, be amended by adding after line 26 on page 5 the following:
““shipper”, in respect of a contract with a carrier for the movement of grain, means the person responsible for transferring the grain to the carrier;”
Motion No. 5
That Bill C-34, in Clause 10, be amended by adding after line 16 on page 9 the following:
“153. If there is a conflict between this Act, or any regulations made under this Act, and any other Act that applies to the movement of grain, or any regulations made under that other Act, this Act prevails.”
Motion No. 6
That Bill C-34, in Clause 10, be amended by adding after line 16 on page 9 the following:
“153. On or before July 31, 2005, all contracts for the movement of grain are to be entered into between a carrier and
(a) a person holding a grain dealer's licence under the Canada Grain Act, or
(b) a producer of grain.”
Mr. Speaker, I would just like to make some brief comments on Motions Nos. 3, 5 and 6. Motion No. 3 is put forward by the Canadian Alliance to make sure that there is an accountability factor in the issue of shipping and that the definition of shipper is clarified in the legislation. This amendment would do that.
Motion No. 5, also put forward by the Canadian Alliance, would make this act precede over all others. Anybody working under the auspices of this act could not go to another one to seek loopholes and to find ways of getting exemptions.
As well Motion No. 6 is put forward by the Canadian Alliance. It is a motion that would make clear that the government would move to a commercially accountable contract based system. Of course the whole bill should have done that in a more dramatic manner than it has.