Debates of June 15th, 2016

Transport, Infrastructure and Communities

[Chris Warkentin, Conservative, Grande Prairie—Mackenzie, AB]

Mr. Speaker, I could not agree with my colleague more. Obviously, he knows this file. He was the author of the legislation with the then transport minister. It was in consultation with people across the country that the ministers, at the time, developed these provision.

However, what I have heard consistently from farmers is that lack of information is probably one of the most frustrating things when dealing with the rail companies. There are two types of information.

One type of information is how much is being shipped on a global scale in Canada. That information should be readily available and it would be helpful if that was amplified. Obviously, that data needs to be collected and needs to be shared more freely. It really helps in planning and providing the building of the infrastructure and the ability for grain companies and others to plan.

The second type of information is also equally important, but it is the most important to the farmer who wants to deliver his commodity to the elevator or to a producer car. It is knowing when the train is going to show up.

I have often thought about this, and it is a relevant point. The world has changed over the last decade. Today we have the ability to track everything at any time. The information should be more readily available. If I want to catch an Uber car in Ottawa, I can click on an app and find out exactly where those cars are at this minute, and when one will arrive. I am not suggesting that our rail companies turn into Uber, but the technology is available to communicate more easily in new and innovative ways. The government should do everything it possibly can to increasingly pressure these companies to increase their transparency and the information that flows to farmers.

There is nothing more frustrating for a farmer, believing that he is going to ship his grain one day, having to change his entire plans. It is one thing if things change. Farmers accept that. That is the life of a farmer. However, when he shows up, having been given no advance knowledge that the train did not show up on the day it was supposed to and he did not find out for days after as to where it went or if it was coming, or whatever, that is highly frustrating. The amount of productivity that is lost as a result of that is astronomical. It is important we continue to pressure the rail companies to provide better technological advancements in sharing that information.

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

Mr. Speaker, we have rarely seen where we have the consensus of three parties on issues. It was the same thing a few years ago when we had the grain transportation crisis. We all got together on the agriculture committee and we worked hard to try to make the bill better. We had multiple amendments to put forward to the government. Sadly, a lot of those were thrown out.

However, once again, here we are working together. I think everybody is on the same page. We are in favour of seeing a lot of these provisions in Bill C-13 continue on. However, this is only for one year. It is not only important to stand up for farmers, but they also need predictability. A long-term solution is really important.

The Minister of Transport is now taking the lead on this issue. He said that he would consult again, but that seems to be the favourite thing of the Liberal government, consultation and buying time.

Could my colleague talk about the importance of the long-term solution and the fact that the minister will have to come back and update us on what his vision for grain transport should be, ensuring that farmers have adequate service?

[Chris Warkentin, Conservative, Grande Prairie—Mackenzie, AB]

Mr. Speaker, my hon. colleague from the NDP is the critic and a fellow member of the agriculture committee.

I want to thank her for advancing this file with me. There were days in Parliament where I did not think she or I were certain as to whether the government would extend these provisions. Her continuing to pressure the Minister of Agriculture and Agri-Food and the Minister of Transport to make this happen, along with myself, was very helpful. I appreciate the work on which we have been able to collaborate. I am hopeful we can continue that.

The transportation system in the country is so complex. When we have one minister and one committee talking about all transport in the entire country, that could be problematic. The reason I say that is there are realities within the resource sector and the agriculture sector that are quite different from subways in Toronto and the airline industry. There are realities, nuances and stakeholders within the agriculture committee specifically. They need to be consulted with regard to any provision or any changes to the act moving forward.

I have made my case on what I have heard back from stakeholders, on the necessity of advancing provisions within the bill into the future, the final Canadian Transportation Act. I am hopeful the agriculture committee and it members will be consulted on the provisions of the transport of agriculture commodities.

[Linda Duncan, NDP, Edmonton Strathcona, AB]

Mr. Speaker, I would like to say at the outset that I am sharing my time with the member for Berthier—Maskinongé.

Before I proceed with my speech, I just want to comment on the mention made by my colleague in the Conservative Party. I have been working very closely with the NDP critic in agriculture in great frustration, with the breadth of the issues in transportation, that for this area of agriculture it makes common sense for those who are dealing, day in and day out, with agriculture issues that maybe these matters to do with the transport of our agricultural products should be going, at least in part, to the agriculture committee.

We will continue to pursue that. Lord knows and those of us who are on the transport committee know that we have a lot to deal with anyway.

I feel confident in sharing that prairie farmers will be greatly relieved that the government has at long last, and at the very last possible moment, taken action to extend the time period for the application of the emergency legislation enacted last year under the Fair Rail for Grain Farmers Act.

One important provision, as we have discussed here, of that law postponed the expiry of the extended access by farmers to interswitching from 30 to 160 kilometres until August of this year. Were this action not taken, farmers would have been greatly disadvantaged.

Greg Sears, chairman of the Alberta Canola Producers Commission supported this extension, which is also endorsed by the Agricultural Producers Association of Saskatchewan, the Canadian Canola Growers Association, the Barley Council of Canada, the Canadian Oilseed Processors Association, Cereals Canada, Prairie Oat Growers Association, Grain Growers of Canada, Pulse Canada, Western Grain Elevator Association, and the Inland Terminal Association of Canada. They all support this.

Mr. Sears said:

Extended interswitching is being used by grain shippers and is emerging as an effective tool to provide better rates and service between two Canadian Class 1 railways, as well as other North American railways. Time is of the essence to ensure this provision does not lapse before parliament adjourns for the summer.

Farmers, especially in the Prairies, need better access to interswitching to get their crops to market. This was identified as a key issue in the Emerson report, but extended rights under the Fair Rail for Grain Farmers Act are set to expire August 1 of this year. This means that many farmers could lose access to markets this season, which would lead to severe hardship.

On May 13, at the request of the Canadian grain, canola, and pulse growers, I put this exact request to the government on behalf of agricultural producers. I asked that the government commit to legally extending these rights for fair rail before the House rises in the summer. While the Prime Minister made a commitment in April of this year, it was not until today that any action occurred.

This motion will ensure extended access for at least another year. For this coming year, Canadian grains and pulses will potentially reach markets in a timely manner. This is critical to provide expanded options for producers to access markets, thereby making grain sales more competitive. However, as grain producers have advised, they require longer-term solutions than just a one-year extension.

Again, as Greg Sears has expressed:

Truth be told, all farmers would benefit from 1,000 kilometre interswitching or open running rights because there are still major farming areas not receiving any benefit from the extended interswitching, such as the Peace region of Alberta that is over 500 kilometres north of Edmonton.

As Mr. Sears reminds us, agriculture is among the most trade-dependent sectors with the majority of product exported. He reminds that rail remains the only economical option to ship those products from prairie to port.

This makes prairie producers almost entirely dependent on the railways for the long-term viability of our Canadian farms. Farmers are reminding us that Canada cannot afford a repeat of the 2013-14 shipping debacle and the damage to the Canadian agriculture industry as a reputable supplier of high-quality grains and oilseeds.

In the farmers' view, these measures are critical to correct the imbalance of market power controlled by the railways. As submitted by the Agricultural Producers Association of Saskatchewan, further measures will be needed to “address the fundamental problem of railway market power as the primary factor constraining rail service and commercial accountability in the grain transportation system.”

The president of the Canadian Federation of Agriculture, Humphrey Banack, an Alberta farmer, has said that extended access to interswitching is critical in order to hold rail companies accountable. He recommends that the extension continue, at a minimum, until after the Emerson report is considered and acted upon by the government in a process, he stresses, of direct consultation with the agricultural producers.

As my Conservative colleague has stated, what would be absolutely critical is that, as the government moves forward to review the Emerson report and all of the issues that arise out of the Fair Rail for Grain Farmers Act, the producers themselves play an active part at the table and not be peripheral. It is absolutely critical to our economy at this time, particularly in areas such as Alberta, where the economy is suffering. Agriculture has always been an important part of the revenue for my province and contributes to the wider Canadian economy. It is absolutely necessary that we get this right and that we do not let the rail companies continue to, frankly, railroad our farm producers.

I am very happy to support the motion, which I contributed to at committee. It is very important that any review of the motion be further expedited so that the farmers have some kind of clarity and are not left hanging, as they were this year, right to the bitter end.

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

Mr. Speaker, as the member knows well, Canada has many trade deals. During the grain transportation crisis, there were boats sitting empty in Vancouver. On the international scene, our image was damaged because we were not able to deliver grain. There were empty boats leaving Canada. Where are they going to go? They need consistency, so they are going to look elsewhere.

I wonder if the member could elaborate on how important it is to make sure that we consult and work with farmers, but also that we have the big stick ready to ensure that the two rail companies are actually doing the work they are supposed to do. When we have all of these trade deals and we are not able to deliver the merchandise as we are supposed to, what does that mean? It means they are worthless. I was wondering if the member could comment on that.

[Linda Duncan, NDP, Edmonton Strathcona, AB]

Mr. Speaker, I would first like to thank my colleague for her incredibly hard work on behalf of Canadian farm producers. She has certainly been outspoken for the dairy farmers, as well as in representing the grain, pulse, canola, and oat growers of this country, and trying to get this matter moving forward more expeditiously.

Finally, the government has come forward with at least a one-year extension, but as my colleague has stated, what is at risk is the reputation of Canada as an exporter of food products. Those who want to purchase in the long term, in Asia or elsewhere, want to be assured that, in fact, we can continue to supply quality product when they need it. A one-year extension, frankly, is just not going to cut it.

It is absolutely critical that the government move forward more expeditiously and resolve this for the long term in the interests of Canadians and the farm community.

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

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to speak today about the motion from the Standing Committee on Transport, Infrastructure and Communities.

We have been calling for the Liberal government to take action on the grain transportation file for a long time. The report simply requests that the changes set out in Bill C-30, which expire in August 2016, be extended for one year. I agree with that request and will support it when it comes time to vote.

Before explaining why it is important that the government extend these provisions of Bill C-30, I would like to give my colleagues in the House a little bit of background about the grain transportation crisis. About two years ago, I spoke specifically about Bill C-30 in the House.

The combination of an excellent harvest and a harsh winter uncovered major flaws in our grain transportation system that cost farmers and the Canadian economy between $7.2 billion and $8.3 billion.

Although the government at the time had known since the fall of 2013 what our farmers would be up against, Bill C-30 was its belated response to this major crisis. The opposition parties and stakeholders had to pressure the government for months before it did anything.

Unfortunately, the bill did not go far enough. What is more, it was temporary, as members can see from the provisions that expire in August.

The Premier of Saskatchewan said that the bill was flawed and disappointing. Throughout the crisis, the Conservatives acted as if the situation was out of the ordinary, even though farmers had clearly indicated that the system was broken and the duopoly of Canadian Pacific and Canadian National over the market was allowing the companies to provide inadequate service without fear of repercussions. There is still an imbalance of power between farmers and the railway companies.

In an attempt to address the many shortcomings in Bill C-30, my party proposed a number of amendments: implementing mandatory reporting of the price of grain throughout the transportation system; requiring adequate service in all corridors; ensuring that producers in all affected regions would be consulted about the regulations; requiring the government to work with the provinces to develop and implement a plan for open access running rights to ensure effective competition in the rail service; imposing a moratorium on the closure or delisting of producer car sites; increasing fines and directing those revenues to compensation programs for producers; and opposing the temporary nature of the provisions in Bill C-30, which suggested that systemic structural problems were actually temporary and exceptional.

Unfortunately, all of the amendments that the NDP presented in committee were rejected. By the end of winter 2015, the delayed delivery of more than 11,000 grain shipments prompted us to try again. Despite Bill C-30, there was another crisis.

As a result, I moved another motion in the Standing Committee on Agriculture and Agri-Food for the immediate study of problems related to the transportation of grain and agricultural products. Subsequently, my colleague from Sydney—Victoria moved a motion in the House.

His motion, which was adopted unanimously on April 22, 2015, called on the House to recognize that an increase in rail service and capacity is essential to the livelihood of Canadian agriculture and that changes to legislation are needed to address the structural gaps in our system.

When I spoke to the motion, I made sure to emphasize how important it is for the government to listen to all stakeholders. That point is important and remains valid.

The current government should improve the system. It should implement the recommendations of all stakeholders, the experts, and especially farmers.

I am pleased to see that the Minister of Transport said that he would take the Emerson report as advice only and that his government would consult stakeholders before making any decisions.

I can tell him right now that producers and shippers are not keen to abolish maximum revenue entitlement and interswitching. Stakeholders all agree, as do the parties here in the House, that these two measures should be removed.

As Dan Mazier, the president of Keystone Agricultural Producers, said:

“The report doesn't address [the lack of competition in grain transportation] at all, and this is the fundamental thing those in the grain industry believe lies at the heart of all of our problems.”

Since the beginning of the year, stakeholders have also all agreed that it is important to extend the provisions of Bill C-30, which expire on August 1. All of the groups I met with mentioned this to me. The members of the Standing Committee on Agriculture and Agri-food received many letters to this effect from such organizations as Alberta Barley, Alberta Canola, Alberta Pulse Growers, Alberta Wheat, and Grain Growers of Canada.

They wrote to us to encourage the fact that we need to act very quickly and that the pro-competitive measures introduced in Bill C-30, the Fair Rail for Grain Farmers Act, do not expire on August 1.

Among the other measures, the legislation provided for the establishment of minimum grain volume targets for railways, gave authority to the Canadian Transportation Agency to establish regulations governing rail service level arbitration, and provided for the extension of railway inter-switching distances from 30 km to 160 km, in Alberta, Saskatchewan, and Manitoba.

Parliament must pass a resolution prior to August 1, 2016 to extend these elements of railway regulation or Canadian shippers will lose these important shipper protection measures.

The report presented to the House by the Standing Committee on Transport, Infrastructure and Communities goes precisely along the same lines. That is why we support it. However, the government must adopt a long-term vision and address producers' concerns. This is important. A number of agronomists and officials at the Department of Agriculture and Agri-food have said that crop yields would only increase.

If the government does not improve our system, we will see more crops like those we saw in 2013 and more crises like the one we experienced in 2014-15. The government must show leadership and must implement long-term solutions for producers.

I sincerely hope that the Liberal Party will keep its promises on this issue and that its decisions will be consistent with what it said and did when it was in the opposition. It is one thing to get all worked up to defend producers when one is in the opposition, but it is another thing to do so when one is in government.

Since the beginning of their mandate, the Liberals have not had a great record on agriculture and agri-food, but they now have an excellent opportunity to take action and to stand up for producers. We hope that they will take this opportunity today and will take action quickly.

Business of the House

[Kirsty Duncan, Liberal, Minister of Science]

Mr. Speaker, pursuant to an order adopted by the House on June 9, 2016, I move:

That the hour of adjournment for the current sitting day shall be midnight.

[The Assistant Deputy Speaker, Liberal, Anthony Rota]

Pursuant to order made on Thursday, June 9, the motion is deemed adopted.

Questions and comments, the hon. member for Sherbrooke.

The House resumed consideration of the motion.

Transport, Infrastructure and Communities

[Pierre-Luc Dusseault, NDP, Sherbrooke, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to be able to ask my colleague a question about her speech.

I see that the government extended the deadline on the measures taken by the previous government. Could my colleague talk about a possible long-term solution to this problem rather than just a short-term solution? What solution does she think would be best to ensure fair transport for farmers? Of course I am thinking about a long-term solution, rather than something that would simply patch things up in the short term.

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

Mr. Speaker, I thank my hon. colleague for the question.

I think many of the provisions passed in Bill C-30 are really important for the industry, as well as for ensuring the safe transportation of agricultural products and other goods. I am really pleased that the government moved a motion at the last minute to extend many of those provisions once again. I think we need to keep those provisions, including the one on interswitching, for example. All the stakeholders and farmers told us repeatedly that they were really happy with the decision regarding the extension of interswitching distances to 160 km.

Perhaps we could consider the possibility of extending that distance, since, as members know, Canada is vast and transportation is rather complex. I would also like to see what comes out of the consultations being held by the Minister of Transport, Mr. Garneau. I look forward to hearing about that and I hope to have some news when the House returns this fall. I also think the Minister of Agriculture and Agri-Food could show a little more initiative on this.

The House will recall that Bill C-30 was introduced by the former minister of Agriculture and Agri-Food. This directly affects producers and therefore we must consult these experts. I hope that the Minister of Agriculture and Agri-Food will show more leadership and, together with the Minister of Transport, will ensure that producers have fair and adequate service.

[Ralph Goodale, Liberal, Minister of Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness]

Mr. Speaker, obviously this measure is of great interest to a province like Saskatchewan and to the farming sector in particular, but it does carry with it implications and benefits for shippers far beyond the agricultural sector per se. That is important enough, but assisting the entire shipping community is also extremely important because that means jobs and growth and effective exportation of Canadian goods, agricultural and otherwise, into the world community.

I would be interested to know the views of the member because I know she has been very active with respect to transport and agricultural issues. Now that the Minister of Transport has provided this year of time during which these extraordinary measures will be extended, what changes would the member like to see in the Canadian Transportation Agency in terms of its authority to more proactively safeguard the rights and interests of Canadian shippers? Agricultural shippers, for sure, but also the others in the shipping community that may need proactive regulatory support from time to time. How do we empower the CTA to be more proactive in the pursuit of shipper rights?

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

Mr. Speaker, I know that the provisions that have been prolonged are very important to keep. One aspect that keeps coming up when I speak to farmers is the importance of data sharing and predictability, knowing when things are happening, when they are going to arrive. That is something that we had brought up and when Bill C-30 was at committee, we wanted to make sure that there was better data sharing, transparency. That is something that I think would be very important for shippers, not just agricultural products, but everyone would like to have better data sharing like we see in the U.S. If the U.S. can do it, why can we not do it here?

That is something that would help everyone. It would make sure there is more predictability and information sharing and then we could look into penalties to make sure that when delays are not respected, whether it is the railways or at grain, that there is some kind of reciprocity. That is very important too. I am really looking forward to seeing what the government comes up with and working together to make sure that we get our grain and our transportation going in Canada so that we can respect our international trade agreements.

[The Assistant Deputy Speaker, Liberal, Anthony Rota]

Is the House ready for the question?

[Some hon. members]

Question.

[The Assistant Deputy Speaker, Liberal, Anthony Rota]

The Assistant Deputy Speaker (Mr. Anthony Rota) The question is on the motion. Is it the pleasure of the House to adopt the motion?

[Some hon. members]

Agreed.

[The Assistant Deputy Speaker, Liberal, Anthony Rota]

(Motion agreed to)

The House will now resume with the remaining business under routine proceedings.

Palliative Care

[Bradley Trost, Conservative, Saskatoon—University, SK]

Mr. Speaker, I have the privilege to introduce a petition of several hundred people from Saskatoon who are calling upon the House of Commons to specifically identify hospice palliative care as a defined medical service covered under the Canada Health Act. With the current debate in Parliament, this is a very timely petition.

Physician-Assisted Death

[Larry Miller, Conservative, Bruce—Grey—Owen Sound, ON]

Mr. Speaker, it is a pleasure to stand in the House today to present a petition from a number of my constituents and others across Canada. They are petitioning the Government of Canada to establish conscience protection for physicians and health care institutions. They are calling upon the Parliament of Canada to enshrine in the Criminal Code protection of conscience for physicians and health care institutions from coercion or intimidation to provide or refer for assisted suicide or euthanasia.

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

Mr. Speaker, I have the honour to present petitions signed by over 500 residents from British Columbia, Alberta, Ontario, and Quebec in regard to the protection of vulnerable Canadians from assisted suicide. These residents are calling upon the Government of Canada to draft legislation that will include adequate safeguards for vulnerable Canadians, especially those with mental health challenges; provide clear conscience protection for health care workers and institutions; and protect children and those under 18 from physician-assisted suicide.

[Ted Falk, Conservative, Provencher, MB]

Mr. Speaker, I have a petition from residents of Manitoba from various communities. The petitioners are asking the Parliament of Canada to enshrine in the Criminal Code the protection of conscience for physicians and health care institutions from coercion or intimidation to provide or refer for physician-assisted suicide or euthanasia.

I also have a petition similar to it, predominantly from folks inside Winnipeg and communities surrounding Winnipeg to the same note.

Public Safety

[Arnold Viersen, Conservative, Peace River—Westlock, AB]

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to present a petition signed by Canadians from Houston, British Columbia. The petitioners are concerned about access to violent and degrading sexually explicit material online and the impact on public health, and especially on the well-being of women and girls. As such, these petitioners are calling on the House of Commons to adopt Motion No. 47.

Justice

[Cathay Wagantall, Conservative, Yorkton—Melville, SK]

Mr. Speaker, in our criminal law, we recognize indecency toward a dead body as a crime. Our criminal law respects a life that was.

Today I present petitions representing nine Ontario communities of Windsor, Essex, Milton, Hamilton, Alban, Sudbury, Dandurand, Woodslee, and Tilbury. These constituents are calling on us as legislators to also recognize life as one that would have been, and support Bill C-225, recognizing a woman's choice to her right to carry her child to term.