House of Commons photo

Crucial Fact

  • His favourite word was children.

Last in Parliament March 2011, as Conservative MP for Lethbridge (Alberta)

Won his last election, in 2008, with 67% of the vote.

Statements in the House

Environment November 18th, 1998

Mr. Speaker, a year has passed since Canada went to Kyoto and signed the environmental agreement and this government still refuses to admit how much it is going to cost Canadians. We have been asking that question for over a year.

The results of a study that Standard and Poor's prepared for this government, and which the government had in its hands before it went to Kyoto, indicated that compliance with Kyoto could cost Canadians up to $7,000 per household.

How does the environment minister think that already overtaxed Canadians are going to come up with another $7,000?

Supply November 3rd, 1998

Mr. Speaker, the basis of the problem is receiving fair value for the product produced, whatever that product may be.

The agriculture community is one of the only areas where farmers have no influence over their input costs. They have no influence over the taxes they pay and somebody else tells them how much they are going to get when they sell their product.

Speaking personally, I have a small farm. I hauled in my crop this year and sold it through the board. It was durum wheat. I had 100 tonnes of crop off a quarter section of dry land and I received $7,300 net in my pocket. It does not matter how many quarter sections there are, that is not going to cut it. That does not pay the bills and it does not put food on the table. It does not keep the economy going.

We could apply that to any industry, whether it be fisheries, farming, forestry or our retail sector. Anybody who is in business, and farming is a business, has to receive a fair price for the product they are producing. That is what we are after.

Supply November 3rd, 1998

Mr. Speaker, we have talked about a lot of issues today but the main thing which was pointed out by the member from the NDP is that this is a Canadian issue from coast to coast. All farmers are being affected by this. The problems as we see them are that we are facing the lowest commodity prices in years and farm incomes have dropped right off the table. There are some reasons for this.

We have border disputes which are mainly due to poor regulations and losses at the trade table. Farmers are not allowed to compete fairly with choice in the market. We are facing unfair subsidies by the EU and U.S. governments. The government has not helped, as I mentioned, at the trade tables. The NISA program is not sufficient and was not designed to handle this magnitude of a problem across Canada. This government has been unprepared and unwilling to come forward and admit that there is a problem. There are high freight costs across the country and our transportation system is in disarray.

Our motion points out some things that the Reform Party proposes could be done to rectify the problem.

Canadian farmers are facing some of the toughest times they have seen in 30 years. Farmers are accustomed to having to deal with the cyclical patterns of the markets. However, prices of nearly all major farm commodities are down drastically and not just down seriously.

Farmers are worried about the border trade disputes, whether they will have enough cash to seed next spring, even whether they will have enough cash to pay their bills at the end of this year. When farmers cannot pay their bills, it has far-reaching effects right across our economy. Gross farm income continues to decline yet input prices continue to rise. How are our farmers supposed to survive? What is at the root of these problems? There are many things but I will try to elaborate on a few.

There are American and European farmers who seek massive subsidies from their governments. European farmers are having a record year. American farmers are in line for nearly a $6 billion handout and they will receive tax breaks, something that we have been requesting for many, many years. Give our Canadian taxpayers a break.

This government has not offered Canadian farmers any of these things. Canada has been very diligent in cutting off its subsidies when it comes to agriculture. The government has repeatedly thrown Canadian farmers to the wolves, all in the name of WTO.

This government has not protected our farmers. Our farmers are the ones who put food on the table for every Canadian and they do it with a passion. Canadian farming is not just a business, it is a way of life. It is a way of life that is unique and important to Canada.

As a result of cutting the Crow rate, producers have had to absorb the full cost of freight which is sometimes as high as 33% of the cost of production. Railway lines have been abandoned. Producers who 20 years ago had to pay for the upgrading of railway lines are now facing the prospect of these same lines closing. The government is so short-sighted that it does not realize the implications of this. It does not understand that a huge increase in truck traffic will require a huge increase in road upkeep.

The Canadian government collects $2.7 billion in fuel taxes from the four western provinces, yet it only returns $35 million. These taxes are supposed to be used for road maintenance, but most of it disappears into general revenue. The roads in this country will be ground into dust if the government does not return the money that has been sucked out of the provinces.

In my area, the intensive livestock area, the fact that the infrastructure cannot handle the switch that the farmers have made into intensive livestock is the subject of much debate. They are paying money every time they start their vehicle through fuel taxes, but that money is not being returned to upkeep the infrastructure.

The government has no comprehensive plan to deal with this situation. NISA is not the answer. As has been pointed out, many of the NISA accounts have $1,000 in them and the average account is $18,000. That does not go very far in paying a farmer's bills.

The Reform Party supports our farmers. It has consistently been the voice for the man in the field. This government has shown that time and time again it does not care about farmers. It has been in power for over five years and has done nothing to improve the lot of our agriculture community. This government is in control of the next budget. When will it make agriculture a priority?

Supply November 3rd, 1998

Mr. Speaker, I would like to ask for consent to split my time with the member for Dauphin—Swan River. This is an important issue to many of us and he would like a few minutes to voice his opinion.

The Environment October 28th, 1998

Mr. Speaker, I will get right to my question. It has been almost a year since this government came back from Kyoto with its climate change position. We have a week to go to Buenos Aires and the minister claims to be ready. However, the commissioner for the environment says different. He says that Canadians have not seen a written agreement with other levels of government. They have not seen an implementation plan and they have seen very little leadership from this government on this issue. So why go to Buenos Aires? Where is the plan or is just another holiday in the sun?

The Environment October 28th, 1998

Mr. Speaker, we need to stop interrupting question period for these Liberal commercials.

Environment October 22nd, 1998

Mr. Speaker, the Liberal commercial is over.

The Sydney tar ponds are saturated with cancer causing toxins. Studies have shown that Sydney residents have experienced a 130% increase in the rate of stomach cancer.

I witnessed firsthand this appalling mess. It makes me wonder what would happen if that oozing mass of filth were on the front lawn of Parliament Hill or on a certain lawn in Shawinigan. How long would it take this Liberal government to clean it up then?

Petitions October 21st, 1998

Mr. Speaker, pursuant to Standing Order 36 I am pleased to present the following petition on behalf of the citizens of Lethbridge. There are 1,750 signatures on this petition.

My constituents believe that some of the greatest problems in our society are the problems surrounding marriage and family life. As family life goes, so does the rest of society. Troubled families produce a troubled society which is what we see happening in our nation today.

In order to protect the nucleus of society the petitioners call on parliament to enact Bill C-225, an act to amend the marriages act so as to define a statute that a marriage can only be entered into by a single male and a single female. It is my pleasure to support this petition.

Petitions October 21st, 1998

Mr. Speaker, I have two petitions to present today. The first one deals with Bill C-68. It has 100 signatures from the citizens of my riding of Lethbridge.

The petitioners are concerned with Bill C-68 for the following reasons. Bill C-68 will do nothing to stop the criminal use of guns, it is not a cost effective way to control crime, it puts thousands of jobs in jeopardy and is opposed by police on the streets in Alberta, Manitoba, Ontario, Saskatchewan and Yukon.

The petitioners call on parliament to repeal Bill C-68 and redirect the money to proven methods of gun and crime control and it is my pleasure to join them.

Apec Inquiry October 21st, 1998

Mr. Speaker, my question is to the Prime Minister. The only thing we want to hear the solicitor general say when he stands up is “I resign”.

The Prime Minister is the only man in Canada who can clarify this issue. Let us try it again. Was Jean Carle acting on the orders of the Prime Minister, yes or no?