House of Commons photo

Crucial Fact

  • His favourite word was manitoba.

Last in Parliament September 2008, as Liberal MP for Saint Boniface (Manitoba)

Lost his last election, in 2011, with 31% of the vote.

Statements in the House

Committees of the House October 31st, 2006

Mr. Speaker, it is a pleasure to rise today to speak on my hon. colleague's motion, which would ensure a plebiscite was held by farmers on whether they support the single desk selling of the Canadian Wheat Board. However, like many Manitobans, I am extremely concerned with the Conservatives' objective of destroying the Canadian Wheat Board for purely political reasons.

I am receiving a lot of calls from people in Winnipeg who realize the importance of this institution to the province of Manitoba. It is important to speak about the Wheat Board and the critical role it plays in western Canada.

The Canadian Wheat Board has been in existence since 1935. It is the largest single seller of wheat and barley in the world. It sells to customers in more than 70 countries. Annual sales revenues average $4 billion and an independent study has indicated that the Wheat Board nets an additional $265 million per year for producers in western Canada.

In 1998 the government changed the structure of the Wheat Board and put in place a board of directors composed of 10 members elected by the producers themselves and five members appointed by the federal government. The reason I say this is because it is important to note once again that this is a democratic organization run by western producers and recent polling has actually indicated that the Canadian Wheat Board is supported by 73% of western farmers. It is respected worldwide as a premier institution in the sale of wheat and barley.

The new Prime Minister and the Minister of Agriculture and Agri-Food want to essentially gut the Wheat Board and do away with this essential tool. I do not think anyone on this side of the House is surprised by this. The new government, as it likes to call itself, has not exactly been a model of democracy over the last eight months. We have seen it in the muzzling of not only its members of Parliament but also of the civil service. Civil servants are being intimidated into not cooperating with members of Parliament. I have never seen anything like this. I have never experienced this in my four and a half years here in the House of Commons.

I am beginning to understand why the PMO is now being called the Kremlin. Not only are the Conservatives prepared to act on bringing in a dual marketing system without a plebiscite as required by law, but they are also now selectively removing 16,000 names from the voters list in an effort to determine who will be able to vote in the next board of directors election.

The anti-democratic way the Conservatives are going about destroying the Wheat Board is one thing, but they also have to consider the economic impact. My colleague has just mentioned the incredible economic impact it will have on the city of Winnipeg if we include the Wheat Board itself and all the spinoff industries, the Cargills and the other organizations that are set up in Winnipeg because of the Wheat Board.

I can assure everyone that the Liberals are not the only ones saying this. The premier of Manitoba, Gary Doer, has stated publicly that “destroying the Wheat Board would have a major economic impact on Manitoba”. What bothers me is that the Conservative MPs from Manitoba know all this. They know their constituents are furious with the Conservatives over this. They know the economic impact to Winnipeg and Manitoba will be devastating. They know the Wheat Board works well for farmers. The proof is when the local Winnipeg media tries to contact them to defend their government's position, they are nowhere to be found. It is obvious the gag order is on once again, just like for every other issue the Conservatives have brought forward.

The only member of the Conservative Party who has stood up for his constituents is the member for Dauphin—Swan River—Marquette. He has publicly stated that he will support the Wheat Board because his constituents have made it clear where they stand.

If the Conservative MPs from Manitoba and the prairie provinces are so convinced that their constituents would agree with doing away with the Wheat Board, why not allow these same people to vote on it? It is a simple question. Allow the farmers to vote on this issue and we will all live with the outcome of such a plebiscite, but it has to be done fairly. The list of farmers cannot be manipulated prior to an election or a plebiscite. There also has to be a clear question.

The Conservative party members talk about transparency and we have seen nothing but back door ways of obtaining their objective of shutting down the Wheat Board. I can only hope that at one point the Conservatives' obligation to their constituents will outweigh their obligation to their leader.

It is important to note as well that numerous producers who have traditionally supported the Conservatives and never thought their party would go through with this are now saying that they will never vote for the party again and that is a very strong message. It is more than that. There is a more cynical plot behind this. This is seen by many as the first step in dismantling Canada's vaunted supply management structure. I am being contacted by groups in Manitoba that have absolutely no link to the Wheat Board that are terrified with what the Conservatives are doing.

The milk producers for one feel that if the Conservatives can do away with an institution that has worked as well as the Wheat Board, why would they not attack supply management next? We all know supply management has served its members extremely well and it has been a thorn in the side of our American neighbours. I guess it begs the question, whose interests are the Conservatives protecting here?

Yesterday the Minister of Agriculture tabled his task force report and I put the onus on “his”. This is a task force appointed by the minister with a very specific objective: the dismantling of the Canadian Wheat Board.

The report's recommendations were a foregone conclusion and let me say that the reaction has been harsh. Stewart Wells, President of the National Farmers Union, said of the report:

Buried in the platitudes is the underlying theme of absolute government control of the Canadian Wheat Board.

Mr. Wells also said:

It is significant that the task force report was first unveiled not to western Canadian farmers or even to the Canadian public, but to a large U.S. business publication Inside U.S. Trade. That should provide some indication of whose interests are being served with this report.

David Rolfe, President of the Keystone Agricultural Producers, had a similar reaction to this report and the negative impact it will have on farmers. He said, “This report is a fraud. It's a cover-up for something this government was planning on doing for a very long time. It doesn't speak to any economic reasons why you should dismantle the Wheat Board. It doesn't recommend a vote by farmers as required by law. It doesn't address the true consequences of introducing a dual marketing system. The fix was in and we got exactly what we anticipated”.

This has to be stopped. The producers are the ones who should be deciding on how their crops are marketed. Why would this new government that apparently believes in transparency and accountability not allow this democratic process to proceed? What is it afraid of?

If the government has such a good pulse on the wishes of producers, as it claims, then it has nothing to worry about. The reality is different. We can look at the recent cuts the Conservatives have made to many programs to our most vulnerable people and the enormous backlash they are facing.

In fact, the government is showing that it is totally disconnected with the Canadian mainstream and its right wing ideology is not selling at all, so it must be forced down people's throats. It is wrong. It is undemocratic and producers, who the Conservatives have always taken for granted, will remind them of this in the next election.

Petitions October 27th, 2006

Mr. Speaker, my third petition contains the names of over 50 constituents.

The petitioners ask Parliament to reopen the debate on the definition of marriage in order to restore respect for traditional marriage.

Petitions October 27th, 2006

Mr. Speaker, my second petition is with regard to violence against indigenous women. Many of my constituents signed this petition, which indicates that government statistics show that young indigenous women in Canada are five times more likely than all other women to die as a result of violence, yet government studies, recommending concrete measures to improve the lives of indigenous women, gather dust on the shelves.

The petitioners ask for action on this file.

Petitions October 27th, 2006

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to table three petitions today.

My first petition has over 100 names from constituents in my riding of Saint Boniface, encouraging Parliament to take measures necessary to immediately raise the age of consent from 14 to 16 years of age.

Government Programs October 27th, 2006

Mr. Speaker, on September 26, the President of the Treasury Board said in this House that the court challenges program was a waste. Does he think it was a waste for Gisèle Lalonde to make the effort to save the Montfort Hospital from the provincial government, or for the Société franco-manitobaine to stand up for its rights and get its own school board, rights that had been denied for over 80 years? Yesterday the Fédération des communautés francophones et acadienne announced it was going to the Federal Court to have the government's decision reversed.

Is it not a real waste to pay lawyers to defend this horrible decision in court?

Canadian Wheat Board October 25th, 2006

Mr. Speaker, I know it is hard to believe but the government is showing even more contempt for farmers. Western producers have been demanding a plebiscite. The Canadian Wheat Board clearly states that a vote should be held. Both Manitoba and Saskatchewan have indicated that they would hold a vote if the federal government fails to fulfill its responsibilities.

When will the government do the democratic and lawful thing and put the question to a vote by farmers?

Canadian Wheat Board October 25th, 2006

Mr. Speaker, the minority Conservative government is showing blatant contempt toward farmers.

Earlier this month the Prime Minister, whose disdain for the Canadian Wheat Board is legendary, slapped the Wheat Board with a gag order, preventing it from advocating for its single desk selling. When he was president of the National Citizens Coalition, the Prime Minister said, “gag laws are unconstitutional and unenforceable”.

Is the Prime Minister not doing today what he found so distasteful not that long ago?

The Environment October 19th, 2006

Mr. Speaker, today the Conservative government reminded Canadians once again that environmental issues are the furthest thing from its mind. Now it is using Orwellian tactics to try to confuse and deceive Canadians into thinking that the government is actually doing something.

We have a clean air act that does not actually clean the air. We have a government that promises action and the first thing on the list of things to do is to run to the backrooms to consult. We have a minister who says she agrees that there is a need for short term targets as long as they are not drafted for four years.

Canadians are sick and tired of the complete inaction of the government on the environment. Canadians believe that global warming is one of the most pressing issues facing Canada at this time while Conservatives do not even believe it exists.

We are still waiting for the government to stand up and take real action to protect the environment. Given the fact that pollution will continue to increase for four years while regulations are drafted by the new government, the last thing I am going to do is hold my breath.

Committees of the House October 18th, 2006

Mr. Speaker, I listened to my hon. colleague speak about the dual marketing system and why it did not exist. It is a smoke screen. This is a scam.

When we put this in place, we are in fact dismantling the Wheat Board. The Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Agriculture has been stating for years that he wants to dismantle the Wheat Board. If that is what the government wants to do, why does it not just come out and say it? Why does it go through this backroom way of doing this?

Would my hon. colleague agree with me that this is a round about way of doing things?

Committees of the House October 18th, 2006

Mr. Speaker, I want to thank my colleague for his comments.

My colleague is right. The Canadian Wheat Board has a great deal of support in western Canada. This is apparent when we talk to people who live in towns near us in Manitoba, in Portage la Prairie, for example. Some hon. members opposite agree that it works extremely well.

Personally, I am surprised that the members opposite are not prepared to represent their constituents. They are under a gag order, just like they have been in every other matter introduced by the Conservatives.

How are these members under a gag order supposed to represent the people in their riding? Some 73% of people truly believe in the Canadian Wheat Board program.

The hon. member mentioned that he received letters and opinions from people in western Canada about the Canadian Wheat Board. We have also received comments from people in Quebec who are very concerned about supply management.

People are worried. Even if the Minister of Agriculture says he will protect supply management, people do not believe him. It is certainly a source of concern. I would like the hon. member to elaborate on this.