Debates of Feb. 5th, 2014

Persons with Disabilities

[Phil McColeman, Conservative, Brant, ON]

Mr. Speaker, first, I would like to thank my two colleagues on the government side who spoke tonight, the member for Renfrew—Nipissing—Pembroke and the member for Brandon—Souris, for their words, as well as opposition members who have spoken in support of the motion this evening.

I have said this before, and I will say it again, I am under no illusions about this motion, in the sense that there is much more to do. That is a point that has been brought up by all sides of this House.

Here is what we know. We have this untapped resource of approximately 800,000 individuals in this country who have one form of disability or another. Those disabilities range from episodic-type disabilities to physical and intellectual disabilities. The broad range of disabilities of those individuals has been spoken about over and over again.

About 340,000 of them have post-secondary university or college degrees. These are talented people. These are people we need to match to the jobs that are available in our country, both public and private sector.

What this motion is really about is mobilizing those people who own and operate businesses in communities, at the grassroots level. I was fortunate before coming to the House of Commons to have owned my own construction company that I ran for 25 years. In those 25 years, I was rewarded greatly by my employees.

I would like the opportunity for my colleagues in the construction industry to consider hiring someone with a disability, and not because of sympathy or feeling sorry for someone because they do have a disability, but because it makes good business sense. The business case that was laid out by the panel that the government put together on hiring persons with disabilities shows that the broad range of benefits from hiring someone with a disability go far beyond what anyone's expectations could be.

First, they are some of the hardest-working individuals in this country when they get a job. There are many reasons for this. First and foremost, it is because they are thankful to have a job. They are a group of people who inspire those around them. Another great benefit is that attrition rates and rates of turnover of employees are greatly reduced. People want to be around and to be inspired by these wonderful individuals, many of whom have had to overcome many obstacles on a daily basis, the kind most of us do not have to face.

I have seen it in my community. I have seen it in groups of individuals who support those with disabilities. I have seen it in individual lives. I have seen individuals who have started their own businesses. When going out to do business for our own personal reasons, as many of us have, I have seen these individuals in our communities. Would it not be wonderful if we took the next steps, as a society, to make sure that the focus is on that pocket of individuals in our community? When we see opportunities, we want to encourage those who have businesses to consider them on their merits when there is a job opening.

That is what this motion strives to do. It sets out prescriptive things that the government can do, many of which are non-monetary. It is my belief that it is private sector's responsibility to step up to the plate. They need to step up and realize that there is this pool of untapped talent out there.

The motion has very prescriptive actions and includes the necessary government support behind it. We talked about accommodation. Things have been brought up, such as transportation. All of these things are pieces of the puzzle that can help. It is those opportunities, those doors, that need to be opened.

I appreciate the support of all members of the House on this motion. It is a motion that can move the yardstick ahead one step. It is better to take it one step at a time than to not take any action at all.

It is a great privilege and honour to have put forward this motion.

[The Deputy Speaker, NDP, Joe Comartin]

The question is on the motion. Is it the pleasure of the House to adopt the motion?

[Some hon. members]

Agreed.

No.

[The Deputy Speaker, NDP, Joe Comartin]

All those in favour of the motion will please say yea.

[Some hon. members]

Yea.

[The Deputy Speaker, NDP, Joe Comartin]

All those opposed will please say nay.

[Some hon. members]

Nay.

[The Deputy Speaker, NDP, Joe Comartin]

In my opinion the yeas have it.

And five or more members having risen:

Pursuant to Standing Order 93, a recorded division stands deferred until Wednesday, February 12, 2014, immediately before the time provided for private members' business.

Grain Transport

[The Deputy Speaker, NDP, Joe Comartin]

The House will now proceed to the consideration of a motion to adjourn the House for the purpose of discussing a specific and important matter requiring urgent consideration, namely grain transportation.

[Mark Eyking, Liberal, Sydney—Victoria, NS]

moved:

That the House do now adjourn.

I would first like to thank the Speaker for allowing me to bring this grain crisis to floor of the House of Commons tonight.

Mr. Speaker, I will be splitting my time with the member for Winnipeg North this evening.

Over the next four and a half hours, farmers and their families will be watching MPs debate the crisis they are facing, and the money they are losing. I am hoping that many other Canadians will also be watching, so that they can have an understanding of the crisis at hand on the prairies. We hope that following this debate tonight that we can see more action from the government.

We have been hearing from many farmers and farm groups from across the country of the frustration they are facing with delays in shipping and the money they are losing.

This last fall, in November, I visited Manitoba, Saskatchewan, and Alberta. I witnessed firsthand the mountains of wheat, canola, and other crops that were building up outside of the grain elevators. I have seen the grain stored, not only in the elevators, but in machinery sheds and under tarpaulins.

At that time, many were very optimistic. The crop was good. The prices were good. They had customers. What more could one ask for?

I recall visiting Curtis McRae's farm in St. Andrews, Manitoba. He had over 30,000 bushels of wheat and 30,000 bushels of canola on his 5,000-acre farm; and it was a very impressive farm at that. He said that the local elevator was not taking any grain, as it was waiting for 600 cars to move the crop already at hand. That is just one example of the many thousands that we are seeing right across the prairies.

As a result, the prices started dropping. The prices have now dropped 40%. The problem is that there is no cost-benefit analysis and no business plan to manage the implementation of transportation. The Minister of Agriculture and Agri-Food even defended the railroad last fall, stating that the grain companies' performance was adequate. It clearly was not.

Promises were also made by the minister to bring forward new legislation to rectify the imbalance in the market power between the farmers and the railroads, to enable shippers to get a decent level of transportation service. Federal legislation introduced last June, the Fair Rail Freight Service Act, was supposed to deal with this situation. Well, it has not worked.

Many prairie farmers agree that the legislation needs to be amended to make it easier to hit the railroad companies with fines over these transportation bottlenecks. The current act is not effective.

We have to realize that over 95% of Canada's export grain is shipped by rail. Canada is the top canola producer in the world and the second largest exporter of wheat. We had over 100 million tonnes of crop out west this year. What a bonanza and opportunity we could have had, and there were customers for the crop.

When we look at the nation's two major carriers, CNR and Canadian Pacific, they say they are each providing 5,000 cars a week, and one is at 5,500 cars, to move the grain. However, that is not even half as much as we need.

Not only do we see this on the prairies with the railroads, there were 20 big ships waiting for grain in Vancouver and 5 ships waiting at Prince Rupert, the two grain terminals on the west coast, and that was on October 31. Today, there are between 30 and 40 vessels waiting to be loaded in Vancouver alone.

We can see that there is a big problem. We have the crop. We have the customers. We have the ships. However, it is just not getting there.

Ships have been idling for as long as six weeks in Vancouver, waiting for grain. It costs $12,000 to $20,000 every day in demurrage penalties. Who is going to pay for that?

I was talking to a farmer yesterday from Saskatchewan, and it is going to come right out of the farmer's pocket. That is who will end up paying for these delays.

Canadian-based grain companies have been charged more than $20 million in fees for delays at the port of Vancouver since August, according to the Western Grain Elevator Association. Some grain companies have sales for China, but they are not able to transport all their grain.

What has happened? What are all of the rail services being utilized for? They are being utilized for crude oil, potash, and other products. They are getting priority. The grain farmers are not, though, because there is no watchdog over the whole system. This is leaving as much as 3 million tonnes of grain stuck in the Prairies.

Canadian railroads shipped 34% more cars of fuel, oil, and crude petroleum in October. They are shipping more products than in the year before.

CP Rail reported a 19,900-car shortfall, according to a January service report. Outstanding grain car orders for CN totalled over 17,000, according to the January 17 report.

Let us look at some of the prices. Less than a year ago, wheat was selling for $9 a bushel; now, farmers are getting less than $4 for the same quality of wheat. That is less than half the price. The fuel costs are all the same, the seed prices are all the same, and the fertilizer prices are all the same, but let us look at the prices the farmers are getting—and those prices are only if they can sell it and get it to their customers.

The problem is not a lack of a competitive transportation system, but that the grain is in competition, as I said, not only with oil but also with potash and coal. These are other commodities that are taking up the rail space. They accounted for 54,000 cars in November. That is a big increase from the year before.

We have a loaded rail cars waiting at the elevators for up to 11 days. Then we have the demurrage fees, which I have already talked about, adding up to $20 million.

We look at all of these losses. What do they add up to? We are figuring out now that they add up to $1 million a day, all of which will come out of the farmers' pockets. Overall, they are losing $1 million a day. What does the minister do? He throws $1 million at the whole project for a study. It does not take much of a study when we call these growers from all across the country.

Let us have a look at some of the farm leaders across the country and some of the newspapers that we get in the Prairies. I will name a few of the farm leaders. I will quote what they say in some of the articles.

The first one comes right out of the Canadian Press. This gentleman is from Keystone Agricultural Producers. My colleague knows very well that it is the biggest agricultural organization in Manitoba. The article says:

Doug Chorney of Keystone Agricultural Producers said the backlog is so bad that mountains of wheat and other crops are building up outside jammed grain elevators.

As prices fall, farmers are wondering what good a record bumper crop is to them if they can't get it to market.

“There is grain in piles across Western Canada”, Chorney said from Brandon, Man. “This creates big cash-flow problems for farmers. We all have bills to pay”.

The minister came out and said that the government will give the farmers a small advance payment. The farmers have all these piles of grain, and the government is going to give them an advance payment. That has to be paid back. It is only going to be paid back if they sell their grain. I do not know where the rationale is, and I do not think that farmers feel any more confident.

That is in Manitoba. Let us move over to Saskatchewan.

Norm Hall is the President of the Agricultural Producers Association of Saskatchewan. I will quote from the newspaper what he said about the legislation that the Conservatives brought forward in June:

Norm Hall, president of the Agricultural Producers Association of Saskatchewan, said the Fair Rail Freight Service Act is just not effective.

He said the legislation needs to be amended to make it easier to hit railway companies with fines over transportation bottlenecks.

“There are no teeth...to make sure that it happens”, Hall said.

The legislation does include a provision for possible penalties of up to $100,000, but only if a government arbitrator decides a signed service agreement between a shipping company and a railway has been violated.

What is that going to do to make the rail service accountable?

That was out of Saskatchewan.

The Conservative members from Saskatchewan or the Prairies must have had an earful when they went home and were at the curling rink or hockey rinks over the last few weeks. It must be a hard go for them. However, there are answers and there are solutions out there.

Let me move over to Alberta.

Lynn Jacobson, president of—

[The Deputy Speaker, NDP, Joe Comartin]

The member has used up all of his time.

[Mark Eyking, Liberal, Sydney—Victoria, NS]

Have I no time to wrap up, Mr. Speaker?

[The Deputy Speaker, NDP, Joe Comartin]

Perhaps during questions and comments, the member will be able to.

Questions and comments, the hon. member for Vegreville—Wainwright.

[Leon Benoit, Conservative, Vegreville—Wainwright, AB]

Mr. Speaker, I hate to agree with the hon. member from Atlantic Canada, not only because he is Liberal but because some of his positions on issues are just plain wrong, but quite frankly, what he is saying on this issue is correct. There is a huge problem. The railways are part of the problem. The grain companies are part of the problem. I do not know whether the ports are part of the problem.

The hon. member for Malpeque is heckling me, saying that it would be better if we had the wheat board, but frankly, it would be worse. We would never be able to figure out what the problem was with the system if we had the wheat board, and farmers are not going there, by the way. They know that is not part of the answer; that has been part of the problem, and the problem would be worse.

However, the problem is there. Some of the information from farmers that he referred to is in fact, I believe, completely accurate. Those problems are there. I have farmland that I rent to people across Alberta and Saskatchewan, and these young people have been phoning me and complaining about the same situation. However, I have not heard a single idea that would provide a solution. I would ask the member if he has any concrete ideas for how we could deal with this problem.

The railways have to perform better, and the grain companies should not be allowed to take advantage of this situation, which only exists because of the monopoly situation with the railroad. There is the choice of either CN or CP, depending on which line is closer.

I would like to ask the member—

[The Deputy Speaker, NDP, Joe Comartin]

The hon. member for Sydney—Victoria.

[Mark Eyking, Liberal, Sydney—Victoria, NS]

Mr. Speaker, I would first like to thank the hon. member for his question, and I have to commend him. He was one of the few on the other side who even questioned the minister on the lack of action.

First the government got rid of the wheat board. The result is not making any more money for the farmers. Let us not open that debate, because it is gone. When the government got rid of the wheat board, it should have had something to take its place, and the railways act did not do it. It had no teeth, and the rail companies knew there was no teeth in it last fall. That is why they kept shipping more potash and oil. It was because there were no teeth in the legislation. These guys had the chance to have a good act that would be a watchdog over the railroads, and they did not do it. They got rid of the wheat board and put nothing in its place, and that is why we now have this situation.

Now they are trying to play catch-up, but it is costing the farmers money. It is costing farmers big money to have this catch-up, and it is not working. What is going to happen with all these grain piles come springtime, when moisture starts to get into it and it starts to deteriorate? Where are the customers going to be found?

[Malcolm Allen, NDP, Welland, ON]

Mr. Speaker, I have been getting emails like all the rest. I am sure that on the other side they are as well, as members from the prairie region are also seeing the same thing.

I wonder if my colleague could comment. Yes, the wheat board is gone, and we are not re-entering that debate, but part of the piece that disappeared as well was the logistics of moving grain off the Prairies. It was then handed over to private companies. That is what the government side wanted. Clearly what we are seeing is that as soon as they get a bumper crop, those particular companies are failing farmers.

Would my friend agree that what really needed to happen was that some sort of logistical support system needed to be left in place, not totally eliminated and left up to private enterprise? What happened with private enterprise through Hunter Harrison and CP is that last year they got rid of 11,000 cars and 440 locomotives. He took capacity out of the system right before a bumper crop. CP made more money, but it left farmers stranded.

I wonder if my colleague would like to comment.

[Mark Eyking, Liberal, Sydney—Victoria, NS]

Mr. Speaker, the member hit the nail on the head about how the Conservatives dropped the ball on this. We see it even at the Vancouver port.

The wheat board used to have a way of controlling where all the cars were going. The grain industry is vitally important not only for farmers out west but also for people who buy the grain, for the livestock farmers in eastern Canada, and for people all over the world. We cannot leave it totally up to the free enterprise system of cars shipping potash or oil. There has to be a watchdog. Someone has to be accountable. There should have been quarterly reporting on this situation to see if people were being taken care of, and they have not been. It is on the Conservatives' watch, and they are going to have to suffer for it.

[Kevin Lamoureux, Liberal, Winnipeg North, MB]

Mr. Speaker, it is really important that we recognize the simple fact that Canada has the best wheat in the world, yet throughout the Prairies there is wheat sitting in bins. There is wheat covered by light plastic sitting in fields. Let us imagine the frustration of the farmer in the Prairies today, who has poured his heart and soul into producing the best wheat in the world, but the Government of Canada has not done enough to ensure that the wheat moves out of the Prairies to the west coast, where we have dozens of empty ships ocean waiting to receive that Prairie wheat.

How do we describe the feelings of the farmers in rural Manitoba, Saskatchewan, or Alberta, given their efforts not only to produce wheat but to contribute immensely to the Prairie economy through the thousands of jobs, both direct and indirect? If we try to get an understanding of how the farmer has been impacted, we would get a better appreciation of the negligence of the government in not doing what it should have been doing.

What we are debating today should not be any surprise. We had wonderful crops last fall. It is no surprise that we needed to be able to get that wheat to the ports. What has the government been doing to address that issue?

My colleague said it offered just over $1 million. One could talk about falling short on that front, but the biggest failure is the government not recognizing early enough the need to deal with the transportation and handling issue. That has to be the biggest disappointment for the farmer today.

I have had the privilege of being born and living in the Prairies. I go to the Prairies every weekend. It is my home. I have been on many different farms as a guest. I have been a passenger in some of the gigantic tractors. I remember driving down Highway 2 a couple of years ago late in the evening and seeing a sequence of 14 or 16 lights. It was combines working together to pull the wheat off the ground.

It is impressive to know that our product feeds many parts of this world. At one point or another, virtually any country that imports wheat has looked to Canada to provide it.

I can appreciate that the handling and transportation of wheat and other products are of critical importance and I do not claim to know all of the details of how that is managed. I look to individuals within my caucus, in particular my colleague from Wascana, who has time and time again raised this issue on behalf of the Liberal Party as the deputy leader. He is an individual who has served the Prairies, representing not only Saskatchewan but the Prairies as a whole to ensure we see the farmers' issues being brought to the House as often as possible.

Our former critics and the current critic are working with the leader of the Liberal Party. They have been saying that we need to bring this crisis to the floor in the form of an emergency debate. It does not happen very happen, where the Speaker acknowledges that what we have brought forward requires an emergency debate. We are pleased that via the Liberal Party critic we were able to bring this forward for debate tonight. At the very least, it is highlights how critically important it is that this issue be dealt with. It is a crisis. People do not have be in economic ivory towers to comprehend the situation and the degree in which intervention is needed.

We are looking to the government to come up with ideas. A Conservative member stood up and asked us for our ideas. I am looking forward to the government members coming forward and sharing their ideas. More importantly, I would like to hear what the government has done to date that should have prevented this from taking place. How is the government going to make amends to the farmers and others it has virtually destroyed?

It has been pointed out that there is a 30%, 40%, 50% loss of revenue. Those are incredible losses. Let us imagine having our own business that hit with a 30% to 60% loss of revenue, and the impact that is going to have. We already ask our farmers to work 7 days a week, 16 hours a day, especially at certain times of the year.

We are looking for the government to come up with ideas. The deputy leader of the Liberal Party has talked about the Fair Rail Freight Service Act. The Liberal Party has been talking about transportation for months, both inside and outside of Ottawa. We recognize the need has been there. My colleague made reference to the fact that he was out in the Prairies just last fall, talking about the piles of wheat that were accumulating back then. This should be no surprise.

We have to ask, why? Where has the government been? The government needs to start demonstrating that it really understand what is taking place and tell the farmers and others who are watching tonight exactly what it is prepared to do to resolve this issue.

A boat sits out in the Pacific Ocean, and every day it costs $15,000 for it to just sit there empty, waiting for the wheat. There is nothing like having a boat go into port, getting a partial deposit of wheat, and then having to go back out and wait for the same company to have another deposit delivered for transfer to the boat.

There is a coordinating element that has been lost. There is no doubt in my mind that some of the actions of the government have caused the problem. That is something I believe many farmers out west understand and will remember. They are watching what the government is doing.

The farmers on the Prairies are starting to lose confidence in the Conservative government in a significant way. We hope to continue to raise the issue, whether it is here inside the House or outside the House where the farmers are, in the prairie regions, and to talk and communicate.

The leader of the Liberal Party constantly tells us that he wants us to connect with Canadians. We are connecting with farmers and are going to continue to hammer home the message that the government needs to stand up and start taking responsibility and being more accountable to the farmers, especially on our Prairies. This is a time of need and we want the—

[The Deputy Speaker, NDP, Joe Comartin]

Order, please. Questions and comments, the hon. member for Prince Albert.

[Randy Hoback, Conservative, Prince Albert, SK]

Mr. Speaker, it is great to have this debate and about time. I have been talking about this issue with my constituents since October or November when the crops started coming off.

One thing I will remind the member of, though, is that it was actually the member for Wascana, when he was the agriculture minister, who came out with the new type of rail system that we are faced with today. He was the guy who actually went to the farmers and said to get rid of their small-town elevators and branch lines, to buy a Super Bee, to go to inland terminals and make a more efficient railway service. Well it was more efficient, but it did not go back to the farmers. Where did it go? It went to ship more coal, more potash, and more oil. That is the Liberal policy on this.

When it comes to the revenue cap, where is the Liberal policy on that?

[Kevin Lamoureux, Liberal, Winnipeg North, MB]

Mr. Speaker, I have two points.

First, let us acknowledge what the member said, that it is about time for this debate. I agree. The time for this debate probably was a lot earlier. However, the only reason we are having this debate tonight is because the Liberal Party said we needed it, that it is a priority, that there is an emergency, that there is a crisis happening on the Prairies.

Second, in regard to the latter issue, I would welcome the opportunity to see a good, healthy debate between the Prime Minister and the member for Wascana on the prairie farm and the decisions the Liberal Party of Canada made back when we were in government, compared to the damage caused by the current government. Never before have we seen piles of wheat to the degree we see today. That is because of Conservative mismanagement. You have to take responsibility for some of the actions you have and have not taken.

[The Deputy Speaker, NDP, Joe Comartin]

The member for Winnipeg North is well versed in the rules of the House. His comments have to be directed to the Chair, and not to other members of Parliament.

Questions and comments, the hon. member for Vaudreuil-Soulanges.

[Jamie Nicholls, NDP, Vaudreuil—Soulanges, QC]

Mr. Speaker, the member mentioned that when we were in government in 1995, the Liberal government privatized CN via the CN Commercialization Act. Section 16 of that act stipulates that “The railway and other transportation works in Canada of CN, of every subsidiary...are hereby declared to be works for the general advantage of Canada”.

Seeing that health of our grain farmers on the Prairies is also to the advantage of Canada, would this member support or agree to compelling CN to act through the CN Commercialization Act the Liberals enacted in 1995, through section 16?

[Kevin Lamoureux, Liberal, Winnipeg North, MB]

Mr. Speaker, what we would ultimately like to see this evening are ideas and thoughts brought to the table, and where there are opportunities for us to be able to assist the farmers, that is what we should be doing.

I am hoping, in particular, to hear some initiatives from the government side. I think as we see time pass, there will be some ideas be discussed and, hopefully, acted upon where possible.