Debates of Jan. 26th, 2016

Resumption of Debate on Address in Reply

[Sheila Malcolmson, NDP, Nanaimo—Ladysmith, BC]

Mr. Speaker, we are already living in a community in Nanaimo—Ladysmith with very wet winters and very dry summers. It is a Mediterranean climate. It has an extremely sensitive ecology that has resulted from that long-term weather system. Whether we are seeing a change in invasive species or in the viability of what kinds of vegetables grow well, we are also seeing real pressure on our salmon stocks and on all of the commercial fisheries, which have traditionally been a part of our region.

We have also been very reliant on forestry and the threat of forest fires and the pressure on firefighters in our region is extreme. I was very pleased to stand, with New Democrat colleagues throughout the campaign, with firefighters for a climate change and natural disaster response framework that would ensure that when we do have extreme waves of forest fires and extreme drought, we are prepared as communities for such eventualities.

[Ruth Ellen Brosseau, NDP, Berthier—Maskinongé, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I want to take a few moments to thank the people of Berthier—Maskinongé for putting their faith in me for a second term. I also want to thank my family, who supported me during the longest election campaign in history, all the volunteers who helped out, and all the candidates who put their names forward in the last election. That is commendable.

I want to talk a little bit about the riding of Berthier—Maskinongé, which has changed a bit since the last Parliament. I represent three RCMs: the D'Autray, Maskinongé and Matawinie RCMs. Matawinie includes Saint-Jean-de-Matha, Saint-Félix-de-Valois et Saint-Damien. I represent 37 municipalities. It is one of the most beautiful ridings in Canada, and I am very proud of that.

My speech today will be about the throne speech, which contained a number of positive points for the people of Berthier-Maskinongé. First, the government spoke about renewing the nation-to-nation relationship. It is important to adopt all of the recommendations made by the Truth and Reconciliation Commission of Canada, and I am pleased that there is finally going to be a national inquiry into missing and murdered indigenous women.

It is particularly important to point that out today, given the report that was issued by the Human Rights Tribunal indicating that, for many years, the government has not been helping first nations or providing adequate funding. It was very important for the government to mention help for our first nations in the throne speech, but we would like more information and concrete timelines.

The throne speech also mentioned the pension plan. After years of inaction by the Conservative government, it is important that something be done to enhance the Canada pension plan. We eagerly await real action with regard to the guaranteed income supplement in order to help lift 200,000 seniors out of poverty.

The return of the long form census was also good news. The data it provides are needed to understand the socioeconomic realities of every community and for many other reasons. Infrastructure development was also mentioned, but once again, there is no real plan.

I also want to mention the change in tone this government has brought about. It advocates openness, transparency and co-operation, but here again, it has to walk the talk. It has to take meaningful action to prove that it means what it says.

Employment insurance was also mentioned in the throne speech, but once again, we do not really know what the government's plans are. We must reform our employment insurance system to ensure that all of the workers who contribute can benefit from it without undue delay.

Unfortunately, a lot was missing from what was a very short throne speech. It laid out a vision but did not say anything about timelines or concrete measures. I am optimistic about what is to come, but the throne speech did not mention the regions, such as Berthier—Maskinongé, and I think they bear mentioning. It is also important to help the less fortunate and the elderly.

I am honoured to be the agriculture and agri-food critic, but the throne speech made no mention of that sector, not a word. I am therefore eager to work with the Minister of Agriculture and Agri-Food, his parliamentary secretary and my Conservative opposition colleague.

We know that small businesses create 80% of Canadian jobs.

Regional economies depend on our SMEs and the farming community. Improving infrastructure is therefore extremely important.

During the election campaign and over the past four years, there was a lot of talk about access to high-speed Internet. That is very important in the regions, and yet hundreds of municipalities still do not have access. This is important to the development of SMEs and to people who are self-employed. This also helps keep young people in the regions and helps draw people there. I would have liked to see that in the throne speech, but there was no mention of it.

The government made some promises regarding Canada Post and home mail delivery. However, we do not yet know if it plans to restore that service. I cannot help but wonder whether the government understands the importance of home delivery for our seniors.

In the previous Parliament, my colleague from Trois-Rivières and I worked hard to make sure that all members of the House were aware of the issues facing the victims of pyrrhotite in Mauricie. Unfortunately, we were not able to get any support, money, or help for those victims from the Conservative government, but we are confident that this government will offer some support.

Pyrrhotite is a mineral found in concrete in some 2,000 homes in Mauricie. This mineral causes the concrete to crack. As a result, the value of the affected homes has dropped by 40%. The homeowners have to raise their homes to have the foundation rebuilt.

On May 30, 2015, a march was held in Trois-Rivières. Roughly 3,000 people attended this non-partisan march to urge the government to provide funding.

Michèle Comtois and Denis Beauvilliers, who live in the Lac-à-la-Tortue area, had this to say about the pyrrhotite crisis:

...the federal government has a lifeline that it must quickly throw to those who are drowning in this crisis.

These people are really in a tough spot. The provincial government has released some funding for them, but the federal government has never done anything.

Some people have proposed some ideas. I get a lot of emails with suggestions on what we can do. For example, a constituent from Saint-Étienne-des-Grès proposes a tax credit. I have quite a few ideas and I hope to work with the Liberal government to get help for the victims of pyrrhotite.

I have already mentioned that I am the deputy critic for agriculture and agri-food for my party. Last year, Quebec lost 250 farms. The Canada-European Union Comprehensive Economic and Trade Agreement is striking fear into our producers. We need clarification with respect to the compensation that the Conservative government announced. We are unsure about what the Liberal government is going to do about this issue.

The problem of milk proteins is another important issue that hopefully can be resolved quickly. At present, medium-sized producers are losing about $50,000 a year. If the government would just tell us when it will take action on this matter, and what it is going to do, I believe that many producers in Quebec and Canada would be relieved. I wanted to explore these important issues.

I also want to bring up another important matter. Every newspaper is reporting on food prices. Naturally, we cannot control what happens to the dollar. However, a plan could be put in place to ensure that the poorest Canadians have access to food. I would like the Liberal government to introduce a strategy to ensure that Canadians will have access to fresh food. I have a number of articles that indicate that the price of these foods will increase by another 4%.

I hope to work with the Liberal Party, and also with my Conservative colleagues, in order to benefit Canadians.

[Nick Whalen, Liberal, St. John's East, NL]

Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank the member for her comments and I congratulate her on her election.

She talked about what is not in the throne speech. However, does she support what is in it? Will she vote in favour of the Speech from the Throne?

[Ruth Ellen Brosseau, NDP, Berthier—Maskinongé, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank my colleague for his question and congratulate him on getting elected.

The throne speech was between 10 and 15 minutes long and contained a number of positive points. Once again, it needs to be fleshed out a little. We do not know exactly what direction the government is taking, and we do not know the timelines.

We need more detailed information from the current government. So far, things have been positive. I agree with almost all of the points raised in the throne speech. Members of the NDP know that they will work with the government. It is important to go further and make sure that the promises are kept. These cannot just be empty promises. Real action needs to be taken. I look forward to the government doing just that.

[Ted Falk, Conservative, Provencher, MB]

Mr. Speaker, I congratulate my colleague on her re-election to the House and also on her appointment as deputy critic of agriculture.

I, too, come from a riding that is very rich in agriculture and has many farmers who are in the supply management industry, but also grain farmers and hog farmers alike.

The Liberal throne speech made absolutely no mention of farmers. One almost got the sense they were thrown under the bus as though maybe they were the sacrificial lamb in the throne speech. I surely hope that is not the case.

What kinds of things should the throne speech have included to support our hard-working farmers?

[Ruth Ellen Brosseau, NDP, Berthier—Maskinongé, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I congratulate my colleague on his re-election. I can honestly say that I was very surprised not to see agriculture included in the Speech from the Throne when we know that one in eight jobs is created because of agriculture. That happens all across our beautiful country.

What we saw in the letters to the minister was a responsibility for the Minister of Agriculture to create a food strategy. The New Democratic Party has looked very hard and we have consulted Canadians and farmers from across the country, and we have a wonderful food strategy, ready to go. We were the only party to have food strategy, a long-term vision, which is really important for agriculture.

I hope to work with the Minister of Agriculture and members on this side to move forward and have a long-term vision for agriculture in the next coming weeks and months.

[Niki Ashton, NDP, Churchill—Keewatinook Aski, MB]

Mr. Speaker, my colleague pointed to the concerns that we have when it comes to the new government's trade agenda. Obviously we have been very outspoken on our side in our opposition to the trans-Pacific partnership and what that would mean in job losses for Canadians. In fact, just a few days ago we heard it was estimated that 58,000 good paying Canadian jobs would be lost as a result as a result of the TPP, yet we do not see any concern from the government regarding that kind of information.

How important is it for her constituents and for all Canadians to see that we have a federal government that stands up for Canadian jobs?

[Ruth Ellen Brosseau, NDP, Berthier—Maskinongé, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I would like to congratulate my colleague from Churchill—Keewatinook Aski on her re-election. I would also like to thank her for all the amazing work she has done in the last few years in the House of Commons.

Farmers suffered losses as a result of the Canada-Europe trade deal. Now we have the trans-Pacific partnership, which was actually negotiated during the campaign. We did not even get to see the full text of it before Canadians went to vote on October 19. Now we know more of the potential job losses in manufacturing. There are going to be huge losses for a lot of farmers, especially dairy farmers and farmers who are under our supply management system. A report came out a few weeks ago that talked about how the number of farms lost in Quebec. We lost 250 farms last year in Quebec.

It is really important that the government ensures we have the best deal for Canadians and farmers. We are really hopeful and optimistic that the government will try to renegotiate. When the economy is so fragile, it is important that trade deals are the best. We hope the government will act on this because we cannot afford to lose any more jobs or farms.

[Vance Badawey, Liberal, Niagara Centre, ON]

Mr. Speaker, I would like to split my time with the hon. member for Yukon.

It is truly humbling to be here today in this magnificent and historic chamber. As I stand here today, I reflect on the words of a former prime minister who said:

The past is to be respected and acknowledged, but not to be worshipped. It is our future in which we will find our greatness.

By being with all members here in Parliament today, we are connected to thousands of men and women who have come before us to lead this great country. They, in fact, had a vision.

People from every region of the globe have chosen to make Canada their home, and almost 500,000 people have chosen Niagara as the place to raise their family, to start their business, to develop new technologies and new medicine, or to discover more about our galaxy. That diversity in Canada is reflected throughout this Parliament today.

As we debate the Speech from the Throne today, I think of the men and women who have stood in the House of Commons before us and debated the following: how to care for and honour our veterans after the Great War; Canada's role during the Second World War; the vision to construct the Welland Canal as an integral component of the overall St. Lawrence Seaway system, which connects Thunder Bay on through Niagara Centre to Toronto, to destinations in the wonderful province of Quebec, and on to Europe, Africa, and China; the creation of UN peacekeepers; the design of our national flag; the development of the autopact; and the creation of medicare. More recently, we can look at the debates about the patriation of our Constitution and the Charter of Rights, which have allowed Canadians to fully control our destiny. I also reflect on the acid rain agreement and NAFTA , which showed how well Canada can work with our neighbours to improve our environment and create new jobs and opportunities for this, our generation.

These are just some of the thousands of issues and debates that have been held in these hallowed halls. It is now up to all of us, on both sides of the floor, who have the honour of being elected by our fellow Canadians to the 42nd Parliament, to pick up the torch that has been handed to us and hold it high. It is with this that I commit to the great people, citizens and businesses, of Niagara Centre and to everyone in Niagara, along the Great Lakes, and across our great country of Canada, that I will do my best to live up to their expectations and humbly accept this challenge to be their voice in Ottawa. I extend my sincere appreciation to the constituents within the Niagara Centre riding for placing their trust in me and allowing me to continue a tradition of public service at the federal level of government.

Niagara Centre is Canada's canal corridor riding. The Welland Canal goes through the riding and connects Lake Ontario and the St. Lawrence to Lake Erie and the other Great Lakes. This feat of international co-operation and engineering is within one day's drive of over 44% of North America's annual income and connects us as a country to markets around the world. With over 164 million metric tonnes travelling through the seaway, Niagara Centre is at the heart of an international multimodal transportation system.

As we debate the Speech from the Throne, I ask my fellow members what we, as a team here in the House, will leave for our grandchildren. In the early to mid-1900s, our predecessors stood in this chamber and decided to build the St. Lawrence Seaway. It opened to navigation in 1959, and 60 years later that investment is responsible for 100,000 Canadian jobs and injects almost $2 billion in annual taxes into municipalities and provincial and federal governments. That was vision.

As Canada looks to reduce our economic dependence on carbon transportation, the Welland Canal within the Niagara region, within Niagara Centre, offers an alternative way to move goods throughout central North America. Shipping on the water, reducing our dependence on trucks for long-distance transportation, would result in five times lower greenhouse gas emissions, carrying the same goods the same distance as shipping on our Great Lakes. Not only would placing an emphasis on a strengthened multi-modal network help Canada reach our COP21 goals, but it could also help address Canada's infrastructure needs.

Today, Great Lakes shipping removes 7.1 million trucks from our roads and highways and saves an estimated $4.6 billion in highway maintenance. Imagine what more we can do to grow our economy and protect our environment with smart and deliberate investments like a strengthened multi-modal network. Once again, that is vision. I remind members of this House that now it is our turn.

What will be this generation's contribution that will benefit the next generation 60 years from now? Canada's canal corridor and Niagara Centre are ready to help Canada reach its environmental goals while growing our economy. Just as Canada is diverse and has faced together, as a country, challenging times with optimism and innovation, the people of Niagara Centre are ready to face every obstacle with an inspiring determination to succeed. We are Niagara. We will help strengthen our nation's vision that will ensure Canada is a country where everyone belongs. Most important, we will in fact work hard with other members to contribute to making it happen.

Once again, I am forever thankful to the people of Niagara Centre for asking me to be their voice here in Ottawa. I want to assure them that, as economic development, infrastructure, public safety, training and education, and trade and exports are debated here in this House Commons, I will ensure that their voice is heard—whether it is advocating for a free trade zone to compete with the American free trade zone just across the border from Niagara Centre; additional infrastructure to get people to work today, in turn ensuring our vision contributes to a better Canada tomorrow; enhanced employment; retraining to help everyone adjust to the changing work reality; or reduction of interprovincial and international barriers to Niagara wine.

As I start this adventure of advocating for Niagara Centre in Ottawa, I have to thank my loving family for their continued support and their love: my wife Lisa, my daughters Logan and Jordan; and my mother and father Claudette and George. To my siblings and their families and my friends, their continued support is very much appreciated.

In conclusion, as we debate the Speech from the Throne, may we ensure we look at it through the lens of a triple bottom line mind set—social, environment, and economy—ensuring our efforts contribute to a clean environment and a strong economy for our middle class.

Although we may be on opposite sides of the House, I strongly believe that this vision will put forward the interests of those for whom we are here: future generations. Our number one priority is to satisfy those we represent, not the party we belong to; to satisfy those we represent today, while not compromising the generations of tomorrow. As we work closer together in the House to ensure our nation succeeds today, we will work together in the House to ensure our nation will walk together forever.

[Erin O'Toole, Conservative, Durham, ON]

Mr. Speaker, it is good to see you back in the chair and working for this Parliament in 2016.

I would also like to congratulate the new member for Niagara Centre on his election to Parliament and on his speech in which he focused heavily on the economy, which certainly in the Niagara region is very critical and reliant on trade. With respect to the member's Pierre Trudeau quote on “the past is to be respected and acknowledged”, I agree.

Those trade linkages, particularly in the Niagara region—both the one with the U.S. and the NAFTA from a Conservative government of the past, our European trade agreements, the South Korea agreement, and the TPP—are very important to a trading nation like Canada. As well, our manufacturers, our wine growers, and all of those jobs in southern Ontario are attributable to them.

Would the member stand in the House and acknowledge that his government will build on these new and important markets that Conservative governments have opened up to them as part of their economic plan going forward?

[Vance Badawey, Liberal, Niagara Centre, ON]

Mr. Speaker, I thank the member for the question. It is a great question and something, quite frankly, that we have been discussing with our constituents from Niagara Centre and those from different sectors, such as the auto sector, trade unions, and of course, the retail and commercial sectors.

Yes, we are going to take these issues into consideration and ensure that our folks—our constituents, our business communities, not just in Niagara Centre but throughout the entire province and our country—are heard and responded to accordingly to ensure that we as a country open up global markets for them to trade in, making our business community and the development of our economy that much more robust well into the future.

[David Lametti, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of International Trade]

Mr. Speaker, I congratulate the hon. member for Niagara Centre on his first election to this House of Commons and on his very excellent maiden speech.

I would like to ask the member, in his role as the spokesperson for his constituents in Niagara Centre, if he would be willing to participate and team up with other hon. members, including the hon. member for St. Catharines and me, in my role as Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of International Trade, to fight against non-tariff barriers along the St. Lawrence Seaway, which include the dumping of waste water in the seaway.

[Vance Badawey, Liberal, Niagara Centre, ON]

Mr. Speaker, that is a great question and I thank the member for it. It is something that we have on our agenda right now with respect to ensuring that we work with our neighbours to the south, and to this extent with the Great Lakes, being the east, to ensure that both state and federal jurisdictions on the American side do understand the barriers that are being placed currently, particularly on ballast water and the treatment of ballast water.

Here in the House, on both sides of the floor, we have to heavily advocate with our American partners to ensure that we are on a level playing field, that the regulations that currently exist here in our country are consistent with those regulations on the American side and throughout the Great Lakes for our businesses and companies that are trading through transits of those areas of jurisdiction.

The regulations should be consistent so that we are on a level playing field. Of course, as ballast water is a main focus right now, as well as other factors that are coming before us, we must take into consideration the need to constantly be on a level playing field and to be consistent throughout the entire industry.

[Dan Albas, Conservative, Central Okanagan—Similkameen—Nicola, BC]

Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the member's suggestion that we all need to work together on things like interprovincial trade barriers. One example right now is that the wine producers in Ontario can send their product into British Columbia, but not the other way around.

Will the member support us in enabling all Canadians to benefit from the wine industry, whether they are from Niagara, Nova Scotia, British Columbia, or other aspiring wine regions?

[Vance Badawey, Liberal, Niagara Centre, ON]

Mr. Speaker, absolutely, there is no question that we will consider any economy that can be built throughout the country.

I ask the member to give me more information, so I can help him advocate for that cause. If he could give me more information so that I can make a decision and help him along with that, I would be much obliged.

[Larry Bagnell, Liberal, Yukon, YT]

Mr. Speaker, I was told at a meeting recently that the throne speech was a good opportunity for new MPs to get up and speak in the House and give their maiden speech, so I thought I would take advantage of the opportunity.

It is a great honour and privilege to represent the great riding of the Yukon. I am really moved by the honour of being elected by my peers, particularly in my riding, which is very diverse and politically eclectic. It was really gratifying for me to have the support of the people of the Yukon.

I have to commend my riding. We had the second highest turnout of any riding in the country. In particular, I would like to commend the first nations people and youth of Yukon who came out in record numbers to show their commitment to democracy.

Of course, all of us have to thank our families. I thank my wife, Melissa. She is such an empathetic, understanding, and supportive spouse. I thank my 7-year-old daughter, Aurora. She is very sensitive and creative, and bilingual on top of that. She speaks a little Spanish from Dora. She also speaks Southern Tutchone, a first nation language from Yukon. I also thank my dynamic 4-year-old, Dawson.

Today, there are number of things in the throne speech we could speak about, but I would like to speak about the vulnerable. That is because it is often said that one grades the success and effectiveness of a country by how it treats its most vulnerable. It has always been a high priority of mine in politics. One of the main reasons I am in politics is to help those who really need it. If it is not to help them, why are we really here? The people who can deal with government on their own are not really our first priority.

Who are the vulnerable? All of us at any time in our life cycle could be one of those vulnerable. It could be all Canadians at a particular time in a particular situation in their lives. I want to talk to a few of those situations and how we are proposing to help out.

First, let us talk about seniors or elders. I am very happy that we are lending them our support. I just cannot imagine, when we look at the size of their pensions and the costs of things today that have gone up exponentially, how they survive. Many members must know seniors who have to make a choice between nutritional food and turning the heat on in their place. It is not a decision that any of us like. It is a bit hard for us in the House to understand a decision like that when do not have to make it. We need to think about them as we make decisions in the House.

I am glad that we will index and increase the old age security supplement. The indexing would be based on a package of goods that seniors use more often than the average person, because they use particular items. It would be more sensitive indexing. Also, our government wants to increase the CPP. That has to be worked out with the provinces and territories. That is not an easy task. If that does not go ahead and the provinces go ahead on their own, I ask that they somehow make it better for seniors so they have a livable income in their final years.

I am also glad that we have offered a large increase for home care so that seniors could more happily stay in their homes. Also, we would open the discussions on the cost of drugs when they become very expensive for particular seniors.

Another vulnerable group is immigrants. In recent years there has been a gradual creeping up in the time it takes to bring in certain categories of immigrants such as spouses and grandparents.

I think members know how important grandparents are in their families, for them to work with kids and be friends with the kids. Can members imagine if they did not have them for five years? Even worse, can members imagine if, tomorrow, someone took their spouses away and said they could have them back in two years? Immigrants have to face such timing. It is very tough. We do not have to face those types of things, but we have to try put ourselves in their moccasins.

People can be very vulnerable when it comes to needing health care, and so I am delighted that discussions have started with the provinces to come up with ways of ameliorating that system.

EI is another area. It is hard to imagine people who have to go home one night wondering if they have to move because they do not have enough income to pay the rent or the mortgage, or they do not have enough to pay for groceries, and have to tell their children that because of this flex in their life they will have to move somewhere, but do not know where. That would be very difficult for any of us. Once again, think of those people. That is why I am glad that EI changes will be coming up, ones that are particularly important for my riding because we have such a short building and working season. It is very limited sometimes because of the number of hours a person can get in.

I think we are all sympathetic to the veterans who fought for the freedoms that we have today and want them to be treated in the best way possible. Many of them have been injured physically or mentally and, of course, we should do everything we possibly can for them. I am excited that we have promised to increase the service standards. Some of the long waits I have heard about over the years for the service they deserve are just unacceptable. I think people in the House would definitely agree with that.

Another vulnerable group these days is average Canadian, which everyone here was a couple of months ago. We know how expensive things are getting, especially for those with families. Just getting by is very difficult for some average Canadians. I am glad we have provisions for that.

Also, with respect to the poor around the world, I am glad we are looking at this issue again because there are, as we all know, some incredibly horrific situations occurring around the world that people are barely surviving, if surviving at all.

Another issue in my particular riding concerns people in rural areas, where employment is often much harder. There are very long distances to services, including medical and dental services. Not all of those services are available in rural communities, including the great rural communities of Yukon such as Dawson, Carmacks, Ross River, Teslin, Faro, Watson Lake, Haines Junction, Mayo, Carcross, Old Crow, Mount Lorne, Ibex Valley, Pelly Crossing, Burwash Landing, Beaver Creek, Marsh Lake, Tagish, Stewart Crossing, Elsa, Rancheria, West Dawson, and Keno, with its 11 residents, to name a few.

Of course, aboriginal people are very vulnerable. Their quality of life and the determinants of the quality of their lives, of course, are much lower than for other Canadians. I am delighted that there is a whole number of items that we have promised in that respect, which I will to speak to in another speech.

Moreover, of course, there are the provisions to help youth, who are obviously very vulnerable, especially financially.

Finally—and I saved the most important point for the last—is the money that we have put in for families, especially low-income families, which will take hundreds of thousands of children off the poverty level. If there is anything that I want to accomplish in this Parliament, that would be it.

[Martin Shields, Conservative, Bow River, AB]

Mr. Speaker, I would like to congratulate the member for Yukon, our northern neighbour, on his speech today.

He identified many areas of concern, including with regard to health. I wonder if he had an opinion on palliative care, as he has talked about many aspects of health. Does he have an opinion of and is he willing to work on the issue of palliative care?

[Larry Bagnell, Liberal, Yukon, YT]

Mr. Speaker, that is an excellent question.

In my private life I have certainly been supportive in situations related to palliative care, with the passing of my parents. As I mentioned, I am glad that we are also increasing funding in the related field of home care.

I am certainly willing to talk to the member if he has some concrete proposals to put forward. That is very important. There is also the relief for the caretakers of people in those situations.

[Fin Donnelly, NDP, Port Moody—Coquitlam, BC]

Mr. Speaker, I congratulate the hon. member for Yukon on his re-election to the House. I welcome him back and appreciate his comments and concern touching on those communities across the country that do not get the support or attention they need and deserve.

The member talked about child poverty. We in British Columbia have the unfortunate distinction of having incredibly high child poverty rates. I share his concern to work to alleviate poverty across the country.

The member also shares my concern for having a strong and resilient Coast Guard. We have a number of stations that have been closed on the coasts, including the west coast. I am wondering if the member could speak about the re-opening or intention to re-open closed bases and stations. I am thinking of Comox, Iqaluit, and other stations, even in Vancouver where the marine communications and traffic centre closed.

Does the government, through the throne speech and the impending budget, intend to focus on reopening and putting the resources needed into our Coast Guard?

[Larry Bagnell, Liberal, Yukon, YT]

Mr. Speaker, that was an excellent question.

I apologize, I cannot answer it. Those areas are not in my riding. I am not that familiar with it. I am a big supporter of the Coast Guard. I am happy that we have talked about refurbishing the boats.

I am glad that the member raised Comox. It is related to another issue that I hope the member will support me on. There are no search and rescue planes in the northern half of Canada. People are more vulnerable, more remote, more likely to die in half of hour from hypothermia in the far north, so why would we not move search and rescue from Comox to the north where people could be very vulnerable in emergency situations and need search and rescue. This has been a long-time priority of mine.

[Elizabeth May, Green, Saanich—Gulf Islands, BC]

Mr. Speaker, I am also pleased to rise for the first time to welcome back my colleague from Yukon.

I did become friends with the member who represented Yukon in the 41st Parliament, but I want to pay public tribute to this member. I first worked with him when I was not in politics at all. I was executive director at the Sierra Club. As the member for Yukon, he used to pay his own travel costs to go to Washington, D.C. to help environmental groups and the Gwich'in First Nation work to stop the U.S. government from opening up what was then called the 1002 lands, the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge, to oil and gas.

It was a terribly important commitment, and he took it personally. He paid for it personally. I am glad to see him back in this place.

Would he agree with me that we should make sure that the Conservation of Canada’s National Parks Act be amended to take out oil and gas activities within Sable Island National Park?

[Larry Bagnell, Liberal, Yukon, YT]

Mr. Speaker, once again, I am not entirely familiar with the details of that, but I am a big supporter of parks. I will certainly look into that and get back to the member.

Hopefully, President Obama is watching, because he has a last chance to protect the 1002 lands, to make it a park, which no other president has. That would protect the Porcupine caribou herd, an international caribou herd, and could save an entire people from cultural genocide because they cannot survive without that caribou herd. Hopefully President Obama, in his last few months, will make that decision that could save the Gwich'in people of Alaska, Yukon, and Northwest Territories.

[The Deputy Speaker, Conservative, Bruce Stanton]

Before we resume debate, I will provide a reminder to all hon. members. This is by no means to point to any specifics of a particular speech we have heard in the last couple of hours. There have been many good maiden speeches in the last little while. From time to time, members use the second person or “you”. In the course of speeches in the chamber, we are entrusted to use the third person in our usual language, “he”, “she”, “they”. That is done for a reason. When using that language, remarks are being addressed to the Chair. That helps to make sure that the speeches are addressed to the Chair and not persons across the aisle or other specific members.

One way for members to avoid getting into that habit is to watch for their use of the word “you”. When members see that their speeches or remarks begin to inflect the word “you”, it could be that they are slipping into that style of speech. They should think of switching back to the third person. This is a gentle reminder. It helps keep speeches less personal, more exact, and in the correct decorum that the chamber supports. I urge hon. members to do that. Again, it is not a criticism of hon. members but a habit that they should get into.

Resuming debate, the hon. member for Kitchener—Conestoga.

[Harold Albrecht, Conservative, Kitchener—Conestoga, ON]

Mr. Speaker, I will be splitting my time with the hon. member for Richmond Centre.

Today it is once again such a great honour for me to be able to rise in the House to participate in our democratic process on behalf of those who elected me from the greatest riding in all of Canada, Kitchener—Conestoga. It is with my constituents' best interests in mind that I speak to the government's Speech from the Throne.

As the MP for an urban-rural riding, I am concerned about the glaring omission of any mention of agriculture. Yes, agriculture is important to rural communities in my riding, but it is also very important to the urban communities that I represent as well. Farmers do feed cities. in my riding there are over 1,200 farms, approximately 1,400 in all of the region of Waterloo, accounting for $473 million in gross receipts in 2010. Farmers are professionals. They want to meet their social obligations in protecting the environment, protecting the health and welfare of animals, and providing the best quality food and products for their families, for their communities, and for the world.

The family farm is the foundation of the Canada we love today. Products have evolved and technology has advanced, but one thing remains constant: from before sunrise to long after the sun goes down, Canadian farmers do the hard work that feeds our country.

The Canadian agriculture and agrifood sectors account for more than $100 billion in economic activity every year and employ more than two million Canadians. The importance of agriculture to our national interests simply cannot be overstated. One in eight Canadian jobs depends on agriculture, those in primary agriculture, food processing, horticulture, farm markets, and more. By the way, I hope that all of my colleagues have taken the opportunity to visit the world famous St. Jacobs farmers' market, in my riding of Kitchener—Conestoga.

Over 100 years ago in 1900, one Canadian farmer produced enough food for 10 people. Today one farmer feeds more than 120 people. These are not people the government should be ignoring when setting out its agenda for this coming session. The Liberal government should be aggressively pursing new markets for our producers while protecting supply management. It should be investing in cutting-edge agriculture and agrifood technology; levelling the playing field for our producers, so they can better compete with trading partners; making science-based regulatory decisions; ensuring an effective and efficient transportation system; and all the while keeping taxes low for these producers and processors.

Our party has always placed high value on our agricultural sector and we will continue to do so while in opposition. Unfortunately, in three months since the election, we have already seen enough inaction on this and a number of other files to make Canadians uneasy about the future.

In terms of the economy and taxes and deficits, our leader said it best in her reply to the throne speech when she said, “...We trust Canadians and the money they work so hard for is better left in their own pockets than in the hands of politicians here”. The constituents in my riding would prefer to invest and spend their own hard-earned money rather than have government determine how they can or cannot spend it.

Three topics I would like to focus on in this section are trade, the government's commitment to lowering the TFSA limit, and its promise to run a large deficit to increase infrastructure funding.

First, on trade, I am very happy to hear the Liberal government has signed the trans-Pacific partnership deal. However, the government needs to ratify the TPP at the earliest opportunity as it is in the best interests of all Canadians. The TPP would provide access to new markets with which we do not currently have free trade agreements, such as Japan, the world's third largest economy. Ratifying the TPP would preserve Canada's privileged access to our largest trading partner, the United States, and would strengthen our partnership under NAFTA.

Ratifying this deal is especially important to our agriculture sector and again I am thinking of Waterloo region farmers. The TPP would allow these hard-working farmers preferential market access to products from great Canadian beef and pork to sweet Canadian maple syrup. By the way, Kitchener—Conestoga is home to the Elmira Maple Syrup Festival, which is the world's largest one-day maple syrup festival, and it will be held on April 2 this year.

By generating opportunities for Canadian agriculture and agrifood exports, the TPP would protect and create jobs and enhance economic opportunities and financial security for Canadian businesses and workers and their families in all regions of Canada.

As it relates to the tax-free savings accounts, the Conservative Party is proud of our introduction of TFSA that encouraged Canadians to be responsible in saving for their own future needs. A few days following the Speech from the Throne, my office received a phone call from a senior who begged and pleaded that I, along with my office, do everything that we can in order to ensure the Liberal government does not reduce the limit that she can contribute to her primary source of saving. This woman, by the way, was not someone who had a large income, contrary to what the Liberal government would like Canadians to believe. Many Canadians have come to rely on these savings accounts when planning for their future. These negative changes proposed will make life less affordable for Canadians who are trying to save for their vulnerable years.

In terms of infrastructure, in December, I wrote a letter to the Prime Minister and key members of his cabinet regarding commitments he had made to infrastructure funding, specifically in my riding. During the campaign, our current Prime Minister assured that an elected Liberal government would fund a two-way, all-day, rail link to Toronto so that commuters could travel to and from the region throughout the entire day. I would urge the Liberal government not to renege on its promise as its Ontario counterparts continue to drag their heels.

As we all know full well, these projects do come at a great cost. The government made it clear in its platform that it will be taking the surplus the previous government left it and entering into a deficit. The problem is that what was once a promise to keep the deficit to $10 billion has now ballooned to $20 billion or possibly even $30 billion. Every week we hear of more holes in the Liberal costing of their platform. More recently, a report from the parliamentary budget officer contradicts the Liberals' claim of a cost-neutral tax increase to Canadians. Instead, the PBO has found that it will cost the government upwards of $100 million per year to fund these so-called tax-neutral measures. It is clear to Canadians that there is always one party that will always look out for hard-working taxpayers and that is our Conservative Party.

We heard in the Speech from the Throne a commitment to keep Canadians safe and to strengthen relationships with our allies. Conservatives have said that in order to stand shoulder to shoulder with our allies, Canada must maintain our commitment to the air combat mission against ISIS and leave our CF-18s in the fight. The Prime Minister has still not explained how pulling CF-18 fighter jets out of the fight against ISIS is helpful to our coalition partners. If Canada truly wants to strengthen our relationship with its allies, this is not the time to withdraw our CF-18s. We should be standing side by side with our allies.

The Canadian Armed Forces and the Royal Canadian Air Force have been carrying out training and air strikes successfully in the region for almost a year. The suggestion that Canada does not have the resources to do both is simply not consistent with the contributions we have already made and is a disservice to Canada's strong record. The brave men and women of Canada's Armed Forces are always willing and able to do the heavy lifting which includes degrading and defeating ISIS, a terrorist group that is committing mass murder and unspeakable atrocities. It is clear that remaining in the coalition fight against ISIS in a combat role is therefore in the best interests of Canadians both here and abroad. It is also for the refugees that we have welcomed in our communities with open arms and hearts that we must remain in this fight. For many of them, a safe and stable homeland remains their ultimate desire. It is our job to provide that for them so that if they wish, they may return to their country of origin and live free from oppression and fear of death.

The constituents of my riding are expecting the government to work hard for all sectors of the economy. The Liberals must address what they plan to do for our farming communities. Furthermore, they expect the government to steer our Canadian economy in a time when global markets are fragile, while stewarding their hard-earned tax dollars well and maintaining the principle that we should not spend money we do not have on things we cannot afford.

Last, as many of our closest friends around the world ramp up their contribution to the fight against this barbaric group ISIS, Canadians expect that we will stand alongside our friends. Unfortunately, these have not been addressed in the Speech from the Throne.

It is my hope that the Liberal government will see the error of its ways and take action on behalf of our global friends, on behalf of our small and medium-sized businesses in expanding trade opportunities, and especially on behalf of our vital agriculture sector to ensure that family farms can succeed and that Canadians can continue to have access to the very highest quality food in the world.

[Kim Rudd, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Natural Resources]

Mr. Speaker, I have been to St. Jacobs a number of times. I have family in the hon. member's riding, and it truly is a wonderful place to visit.

I come from a rural riding, and I want to talk a bit about the member's comments and ask a question about the agriculture community.

I watched over the past 10 years as supports like the agristability fund were cut and needed supports for our farmers and our agriculture communities were reduced and in some cases disappeared.

Would the member opposite work with our government to ensure our agriculture community and our farmers receive the supports they need to continue to feed our communities, and indeed our country?