All those in favour of the motion will please say yea.
House of Commons Hansard #102 of the 41st Parliament, 2nd Session. (The original version is on Parliament's site.) The word of the day was prostitution.
House of Commons Hansard #102 of the 41st Parliament, 2nd Session. (The original version is on Parliament's site.) The word of the day was prostitution.
Strengthening Canadian Citizenship ActGovernment Orders
Strengthening Canadian Citizenship ActGovernment Orders
Strengthening Canadian Citizenship ActGovernment Orders
The Acting Speaker Barry Devolin
In my opinion the yeas have it.
And five or more members having risen:
Pursuant to an order made on Tuesday, May 27, the division stands deferred until Monday, June 16, at the expiry of the time provided for oral questions.
Peter Julian NDP Burnaby—New Westminster, BC
Mr. Speaker, there have been discussions among the parties, and I think that if you seek it, you will find unanimous consent to see the clock at 12 midnight.
Strengthening Canadian Citizenship ActGovernment Orders
The House resumed from May 26 consideration of the motion that Bill C-18, An Act to amend certain Acts relating to agriculture and agri-food, be read the second time and referred to a committee.
Peter Julian NDP Burnaby—New Westminster, BC
Mr. Speaker, I will be pleased to speak to Bill C-18, though the government did not have the courtesy to actually tell us which bill it was bringing forward. New Democrats always plan in advance, so each one of us has all the bills with us and ready to go for the speech itself—
Peter Julian NDP Burnaby—New Westminster, BC
Mr. Speaker, could you please get some order in the House?
Agricultural Growth ActGovernment Orders
The Acting Speaker Barry Devolin
Order, please. It has been a long day. There are 20 more minutes to go.
Peter Julian NDP Burnaby—New Westminster, BC
Mr. Speaker, I think the government is a little sore. It has lost two rulings today, and I think it feels just a little badly.
Before I begin, Mr. Speaker, could you please let me know the time allocation I have for this particular speech?
Agricultural Growth ActGovernment Orders
Peter Julian NDP Burnaby—New Westminster, BC
Mr. Speaker, on December 9, the Minister of Agriculture and Agri-Food tabled Bill C-18, the agricultural growth act.
Bill C-18 is another Conservative omnibus bill, making changes to nine different pieces of legislation, some of which we support, and others that pose significant concerns. Unlike the government's everything but the kitchen sink omnibus budget bills—and we have certainly seen omnibus budgets with everything thrown in together—in Bill C-18, perhaps following the good advice that the NDP has provided, changes actually all relate to agriculture. For once, we actually have a omnibus bill where all the provisions are related.
This is important, because we have seen, particularly with the budget bills, an absurd number of different pieces of legislation put together. We have seen absolutely absurd combinations, with environmental laws, natural resources laws, and taxation laws like the FATCA provisions that were in Bill C-31 all thrown together into one particular bill.
In the case of Bill C-18, we have an omnibus bill that puts in place amendments all related to agriculture, in some cases making similar edits to different bills.
First, there are amendments to the Plant Breeders' Rights Act. The key changes move Canada towards ratification of the 1991 model law of the International Union for the Protection of New Varieties of Plants, UPOV '91.
Second, it expands the rights afforded to plant breeders for the varieties they develop and increases the places along the value chain where plant breeders can collect royalties.
Bill C-18 also includes the following new exclusive rights for plant breeders: reproduction, conditioning, sales, export or import, repeated use to produce commercially another plant variety if the repetition is necessary for that purpose, and stocking for the purpose of any of the other protected acts.
The term of the grant of plant breeders' rights has also been increased from previous legislation, from 18 years to 20 years. It is 25 years in the case of a tree, a vine, or any other category listed by the regulation. It also includes a new clause that grants farmers' privilege, allowing farmers to save seed and condition seed for purposes of production and reproduction on their own farms. It is important to note that this privilege is not extended to the storing of seed or to the sale of harvested material from protected seed.
Bill C-18 also grants the CFIA the ability to make changes through regulation to which circumstances and classes of farmers and varieties would not be covered under the farmers' privilege. This protects the rights of researchers to use patented materials as the basis for developing a new variety or for another research use. It also enhances public accessibility to the registry of plant varieties. This of course is a major change from the previous act.
It also maintains the ability of the CFIA to grant compulsory licences to ensure that in certain situations, plant varieties are available at reasonable prices, widely distributed, and of good quality.
Bill C-18 also includes an amendment that allows plant breeders to request that their plant breeders' rights be exempt from a compulsory licence. It also grants the government the ability to make changes governing exemptions from compulsory licensing through regulations, without legislative change.
There are some benefits in Bill C-18.
First, it would ensure that variety developers would be able to see a return on investment for their plant breeding research efforts, providing incentives for an important sector of Canadian agribusiness. It would also grant farmers' privilege to allow farmers to save the conditioned seed for use on their own farms. It would promote access for Canadian farmers to the results of private breeding research from Canada and other countries through more effective intellectual property rights. As members know, this is a concern people have raised.
It would protect researchers from infringement of plant breeders' rights. It would enhance public accessibility and transparency when it comes to plant breeding, and it would maintain the existing compulsory licence system, providing some assurance that varieties can be made available at reasonable prices, widely distributed, and kept at a high quality. This is a very important aspect of the bill that I know members will find interesting.
I know my colleagues in the NDP are very focused on this agriculture bill, because, as we know, we have a whole variety of NDP MPs representing some of the heartland of Canadian agriculture across the country.
I would like to say at this point that we have diversity like we have never had before in the House of Commons, and from both rural and urban areas. It is just fantastic to see the NDP caucus, 100 strong, which is going to grow to perhaps double that after the next election. We are certainly looking forward to that.
One might ask why the member for Burnaby—New Westminster is speaking on an agriculture bill. Perhaps the government House leader is asking that question too. The reality, and I know members will find this interesting, is that the most fertile land in all of Canada is in Burnaby. That particular area is known as the Big Bend area of Burnaby. It is part of the Fraser delta. The Fraser River comes down, after going through the Coast Mountains, and provides for incredibly fertile ground.
I should say, because I think it is important to note, that not only is it the most fertile ground, but because of the previous actions of the B.C. NDP government back in 1972, which established the agricultural land reserve, the first government in the country to do that, the agricultural land in Burnaby has been preserved. That is extremely important. It is an urban area, but right there is the agricultural heartland of the Lower Mainland.
What is even more important to note is that the city of Burnaby, for the last 25 years, has been run by an NDP government, under the Burnaby Citizens Association. In fact, in the last municipal election, with a strong agricultural component, the mayor, the entire city council, eight of eight city councillors, and seven of seven on the school board, meaning every single municipally elected official, were members of the NDP and members of the Burnaby Citizens Association. That is the longest-standing—
Dan Albas Conservative Okanagan—Coquihalla, BC
Mr. Speaker, I rise on a point of order.
Usually I would love to hear in this place talk of beautiful British Columbia, but perhaps the member could please bring this to a point of relevance. Perhaps he could say how Bill C-18 would actually benefit our home province. I think that would be a good turn of events.
Agricultural Growth ActGovernment Orders
The Acting Speaker Barry Devolin
We can go back to the hon. member once again. Relevance is relevant in this place, and I am sure he can connect what he is saying to the matter before the House.
Peter Julian NDP Burnaby—New Westminster, BC
Absolutely, Mr. Speaker.
The point is simply this. The Burnaby Citizens Association, NDP affiliated, swept all those seats because its representatives had been putting forward the preservation of agricultural land in the city of Burnaby. On plant breeders rights, they actively worked on the types of issues that we now see, finally, the federal government wake up on.
I have one more point, which is that Maclean's national magazine said that the city of Burnaby, NDP-run for 25 years, was actually the best-managed city in all of Canada. That is because that party pays close attention to the details, including agricultural work.
I will now talk about some of the concerns about Bill C-18, which my colleagues have already raised on the floor of the House of Commons. However, there are a few major concerns regarding the clauses on farmers' privilege.
First, the farmers' privilege does not include the stocking of propagating material for any use. Even if farmers are able to save seed for the purpose of reproduction, whether we are talking about the city of Burnaby or any other part of the country, it appears they may have to pay to store it, which would effectively negate that privilege.
Also, farmers' privilege does not extend to the sale of harvested material. This means that farmers will likely still be required to pay for the sale of the crops grown from farm saved seed.
It also means that plant breeders could potentially generate revenue on a farmer's entire production rather than just on the seed purchased to grow the crop. This could have significant impacts on the profit margin of farmers. I will get back to this before I end, because I am going to say some things that I know my Conservative colleagues are going to react to.
This issue of the profit margins for farmers is a very important component. Unfortunately, I regret to say, the Conservatives have a pretty poor record in that area.
Some farmers say paying a royalty based on what they produce instead of the seed they buy reduces their risk. If they harvest a poor crop, they pay less with an end-point royalty compared to paying up front when they buy seed.
Another concern that has been raised with Bill C-18 is it includes amendments that would allow the CFIA to make changes through regulation, not legislation, to the farmers' privilege. This means the government could significantly hinder these rights at any time without parliamentary oversight.
Unfortunately, the Conservative government has a notoriously bad record in terms of rights, rules, following due process, all those kinds of things. To put in place another situation where the government basically can do whatever the heck it wants to do, and we know the Conservative government loves that drunk with power, without parliamentary oversight has raised real concerns among the agricultural community, including in my area, the Big Bend area of Burnaby, British Columbia. Again, I will mention that it is the most fertile farm land in all of Canada.
Allowing for farm safe seed is an optional exception, and this is under the UPOV '91, meaning that Canada could disallow farm-safe seed and still fulfill its international obligations under the agreement.
While Bill C-18 goes so far as so define what is meant by “document”, it provides no definition of “farmer”. This has important implications for the enforcement of the farmers' privilege, especially given that Bill C-18 would allow the government to make significant changes to the farmers' privilege provisions through regulatory changes.
This is a concern that farmers have expressed right across the country, including in many of the farming regions that are represented by the strong rural caucus in the NDP. It is a wonderful caucus that represents farmers extremely effectively across the country, particularly in central and Atlantic Canada, as well as British Columbia.
Given the government's recent changes in Bill C-18 that would limit farm loss deductions to people whose primary income would be from farming, this is an area where obviously more clarity is needed.
In order to prevent the privatization of existing varieties, our common heritage of public seeds developed over millennia, we must ensure a variety registration system that ensures new crop varieties are as good or better than existing ones. This is very important. We also must ensure that farmers will continue to have access to existing cereal varieties that were developed by public plant breeders.
There are also a few concerns regarding the potential legal burden for producers. The Canadian Federation of Agriculture has called for protections for producers from claims of patent infringement with respect to natural accidental spreading of patented plant genetic material. However, these protections are not included in Bill C-18. This is an oversight and obviously a matter of some concern.
Given the expansion of plant breeders' rights under Bill C-18, it is likely that farmers will face increased and expensive litigation. However, producers may well be on an extremely uneven financial playing field with plant breeders. There are no provisions in Bill C-18 to ensure that legal fees do not impede the defence of farmers in such cases.
There are amendments to the Agricultural Marketing Programs Act and the advance payments program. The advance payments program is a financial loan guarantee program that gives producers easier access to credit through cash advances. The APP provides producers with a cash advance on the value of the agricultural products during a specified period. This improves the cashflow of producers throughout the year and helps them meet their financial obligations, and benefit from the best market conditions.
This is where I come back to the whole issue of farm profitability. The area of the country where we have the lowest level of farm receipts is the province of Alberta, which has been governed by Conservatives for decades. This is something we have encountered across the country. There is no doubt, not just when we talk about the gutting of the Canadian Wheat Board, but in general, that farmers simply do not fare as well when Conservative governments are in place.
The Conservatives may not like the truth and may not be able to handle the truth, but the truth is the truth. They have the lowest level of farm receipts in the country. I have been to the farms in southern Alberta, where they are really trying to get by because of poor decisions both at the federal level and at the provincial level. We have seen those farm receipts going through the gun.
There is one exception, and that is the supply-managed sector. The supply-managed sector has had no better friend than the New Democratic Party caucus, which has stood up again and again. Every time the government tries to gut supply management, whether it is negotiating trade deals or anywhere else, we stand with the supply-managed farmers and the communities that depend on them. That is the one area of the country where receipts have not gone through the floor. Farmers—
Agricultural Growth ActGovernment Orders
The Acting Speaker Barry Devolin
Order, please. The time for government orders has expired. When this matter returns before the House, the hon. member for Burnaby—New Westminster will have two minutes remaining in his speech and questions and comments.
A motion to adjourn the House under Standing Order 38 deemed to have been moved.
Kirsty Duncan Liberal Etobicoke North, ON
Mr. Speaker, South Sudan faces three concurrent crises, with an ongoing conflict, an acute humanitarian crisis, and a chronic food and security problem.
South Sudan is a level three humanitarian emergency. Violence has displaced more than one million people, 923,000 within the country, more than half of them children, and 300,000 people having fled to neighbouring countries.
With the rainy season, the situation will only get worse. Life-saving supplies must be deployed to the hardest to reach in order to avert a humanitarian catastrophe. Air drops are taking place and famine is probable.
The UN has warned that, if the conflict in South Sudan continues, half of the country's 12 million people will either be starving, internally displaced, refugees abroad, or dead by the year's end. According to the UN in May, the international community urgently needed to donate at least another $500 million if South Sudan's devastating slide into famine and humanitarian crisis was to be stopped.
Therefore, on May 16, 2014, I asked the government, “Will Canada attend the May 19-20 donor-pledging conference in Norway, and will it increase its support?”
Unfortunately, the response I received was only an expression of concern, a statement of what the government is currently doing, and a promise to monitor the situation. That is, I received no answer, no promise to attend the donor conference, and no promise to pledge.
That is not good enough, when the political divisions within South Sudan had resulted in heavy fighting and mass atrocities. In Bentiu, for example, civilians were targeted on the basis of their ethnicity and nationality. Radio stations were used to broadcast hate speech, urging men to rape women of specific ethnicities and demanding that rival groups be expelled from the town.
After receiving no answer from the government regarding the donor conference, we issued a press release calling on the government to send representatives to attend the international conference to see what further help Canada could provide to address the dire humanitarian crisis in South Sudan.
Why did the government refuse to answer my simple question: that is, would the government attend or not? It is shameful that Canada refused to pledge at the conference.
There is overcrowding, competition for shelter and life-saving humanitarian aid, and an increased risk of disease and infection in South Sudan. We have to stand by the people of South Sudan. Expressed concern is not enough. We have to do more.
Deepak Obhrai ConservativeParliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Foreign Affairs and for International Human Rights
Mr. Speaker, I want to thank the member for raising this issue of the situation in South Sudan. I agree on many of the points with respect to the situation in South Sudan. Due to the conflict and other reasons, it is deteriorating very badly and requires attention. I can tell her in no uncertain terms that, contrary to what she has been telling us—that Canada is not involved—Canada has been involved in South Sudan from the day that country became independent. Prior to that, Canada was one of the major countries, not only as a donor but in assisting toward achieving peace.
I myself have visited that country twice. Following the birth of this nation, we had great hopes that this would move forward. Unfortunately, the political infighting that has taken place has really put South Sudan way back with respect to development assistance.
Together with its partners, Canada has been working to see what is the best way forward, working with the Government of South Sudan in moving forward to meet its development assistance needs.
It is true that the UN is there now to stop the fighting.
Some good news that I want to share with the hon. member, which came yesterday, was that both parties who were fighting have agreed to peace in Addis Ababa, led by the African Union. Hopefully, that peace will work toward assuring a climate where all the assistance we have been giving reaches its destination.
Making announcements or attending donor conferences is not the one effective way to reach out or to offer assistance. Rather, it is to work together jointly with the other partners that we have identified. In the case of South Sudan, we have identified partners and what we can do.
Only two weeks ago in Calgary I announced development assistance to the Red Cross so it can use mobile units for the child maternity cases in South Sudan. We are working with our NGO partners. Canada is on the ground in South Sudan. We hope that the people of South Sudan very quickly resolve their differences and move forward, and that the situation, as the hon. member has described, is averted, most importantly the humanitarian crisis.
Kirsty Duncan Liberal Etobicoke North, ON
Mr. Speaker, we all hope that the good news yesterday will hold.
The government has given in the past, but its approach needs to be rethought and needs to take into consideration the long-term problems caused by the civil conflict begun in December 2013. Will the government support civil society coalitions that are working for peace and reconciliation in South Sudan? How will the government monitor humanitarian needs and respond in a timely fashion to the changing needs on the ground? Will the government consider support to UNMISS to protect civilians, especially women and children, from violence? Will the government encourage the UN Special Representative of the Secretary-General for Children and Armed Conflict to travel to South Sudan and request a report to the UN Security Council on the situation of children in South Sudan?
Canada must remain engaged to keep South Sudan at the forefront of international attention. We do hope that this news yesterday continues, and that the good news holds.
Deepak Obhrai Conservative Calgary East, AB
Mr. Speaker, I can assure the hon. member that Canada is working with the United Nations on many of the issues the member is talking about, including, as I just said, with NGOs to provide development assistance out there. However, most importantly, we need a climate of security in that country so that we can work there and build on development assistance. There is no point in building all those things, and then intertribal fighting breaks out and we lose everything.
However, let me say that Canada is very much engaged internationally with our partners, most importantly with the United Nations, in achieving what the member has said. We both have the same interest, which is South Sudan finding its feet in Africa as a new nation and moving forward.