Carol Skelton

[Access To Information, June 7th, 2001]

Mr. Speaker, our requests about Shawinigate do not receive a answer. Questions about last year's disastrous internal audit are met with months of silence.

We requested a list of HRDC grants and contributions to the minister's own riding and were told it would cost us $6,000 even though the information used to be provided to us free.

When will this minister stop stonewalling the official opposition and start obeying the law?

[Access To Information, June 7th, 2001]

Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Minister of Human Resources Development.

We have learned that the department has struck an internal review committee to vet the approval of all access to information requests, but it appears the net result of the committee has been to deny information to the official opposition. In fact we have had to appeal to the information commissioner to help us get answers to 31 access to information requests.

Does the minister think it is appropriate for her officials to disregard both the spirit and the letter of the access law passed by parliament?

[Farm Credit Corporation Act, June 7th, 2001]

Mr. Speaker, our concerns on this subject were increased during the clause by clause debate in committee. The chairman of the FCC indicated that FCC could consider taking possession of land in the government's yet to be announced plans to facilitate the intergenerational transfer of farmland. As a mother who has lost two sons from the farm, I am very concerned about this.

The FCC and the government should have no objections to the motion because the FCC has stated, in testimony before the committee, that it is not FCC's intention to become a landholder. The FCC has also testified that it works to ensure that land is sold at prevailing market prices and that FCC does not influence land values. I know in my own riding that it does.

Motion No. 2 reads:

That Bill C-25, in Clause 5, be amended by replacing lines 32 and 33 on page 2 with the following:

“that complement but do not directly compete with those available from the private sector, or that complement but do not duplicate those provided by other publicly owned institutions;”

The motion is designed to ensure that the federal government does not actively compete with private financial institutions, such as credit unions and the banks.

During the committee review of Bill C-25, representatives of Canada's credit unions indicated that the Farm Credit Corporation currently actively competes for business. I know it does in my own riding. One witness testified that his credit union lost a customer because the FCC dropped its loan rate after learning of the rate offered by the credit union. The expansion of the FCC's powers would make this active competitive behaviour much more likely.

We are also concerned that the expanded powers of the FCC would simply duplicate the existing authority of other public financial institutions ,such as the Business Development Bank which, as we all know, does not have a good track record. The motion would ensure that the FCC's new powers would not duplicate the authority and problems of the BDC.

Motion No. 1 reads:

That Bill C-25, in Clause 5, be amended by replacing lines 12 to 18 on page 2, with the following:

“services and products to farming operations and to those small and medium-sized businesses in rural Canada that are businesses related to farming. The primary focus of the activities of the Corporation shall be on farming operations.”

This motion is designed to address one of our most serious concerns with Bill C-25; that the corporation could lose its focus on providing services to farmers because of its involvement in off-farm businesses.

According to the current wording of the bill, the FCC could loan money to agriculture businesses, no matter how large or lucrative. For example, the Farm Credit Corporation could give a loan to the Saskatchewan Wheat Pool if the government concluded that this was the direction in which they wanted to go. The motion would ensure that any services offered to non-farm operations would only be given to small and medium sized businesses and not large corporations.

The government and the FCC should not object to the motion because they have repeatedly stated that they have no interest in providing financial services to large corporations.

I ask members sitting opposite to look at our motions and, on behalf of the rural residents in my riding of Saskatoon—Rosetown—Biggar, to respect our opinion as farm people from western Canada.

[Farm Credit Corporation Act, June 7th, 2001]

You have not been there long enough because—

[Farm Credit Corporation Act, June 7th, 2001]

Mr. Speaker, it is indeed a pleasure to speak on the amendments put forward by the Canadian Alliance to Bill C-25, an act to amend the Farm Credit Corporation Act.

Motion No. 3 reads:

That Bill C-25, in Clause 5, be amended by adding after line 44 on page 2 the following:

“(f.4.1.) dispose of farmland acquired by it, provided that the disposal is at fair market value and is done as quickly as possible, and in any case no longer than five years, after the acquisition.”

The Canadian Alliance is concerned that Bill C-25 would allow the Farm Credit Corporation to become a significant landholder. We are seeing that especially in the province of Saskatchewan. The amendment is designed to ensure that the federal government does not become a major holder of Canadian farmland and does not unduly influence the market price of land.

I have spoken to many farmers who have told me that the Farm Credit Corporation has had an effect on farmland prices. The hon. parliamentary secretary can come to Saskatchewan and visit my riding to see the truth.

[Petitions, June 6th, 2001]

Mr. Speaker, I have a petition from people from the rural municipality of Etonia in Saskatchewan who wish to have the liquid strychnine for the control of Richardson's ground squirrel made available to agricultural producers.

[Saskatoon Police Force, June 5th, 2001]

Mr. Speaker, the city of Saskatoon has recently embarked on a community policing initiative that is seeking input from all interested parties.

Policing involves everybody in the community. Individually we may be affected through the services that are provided, whether it is crime prevention, investigation, enforcement or through the payment of property taxes that are needed to deliver those services.

To ensure safe and secure communities, the Saskatoon Board of Police Commissioners is asking for help in determining priorities for policing in its neighbourhoods. The Board of Police Commissioners is encouraging input in a number of ways, including visiting its scheduled open houses, letter writing, online submissions and small group meetings.

On behalf of the constituents of Saskatoon—Rosetown—Biggar, I wish to commend the Saskatoon police force for embarking on this initiative. I know that the outcome of this process will produce a better police force and a safer community.

[Census Records, May 31st, 2001]

Mr. Speaker, in today's National Post there is a story about Grey Alexander, an Alberta sheep farmer, who is upset that the local area census worker has access to personal information about him.

Mr. Alexander was contacted by a census worker after he failed to complete the long census form in full. The problem is the census worker is someone he knows quite well.

To quote Mr. Alexander, “Elements of my income end up with somebody I see twice a week. What if it's a business competitor or somebody you have acrimony with? This is a small town”.

In today's Saskatoon Star Phoenix there is a letter describing a similar situation. To quote the writer, “There is no one in our community to whom I knowingly would have provided all the private personal confidential information contained in the census form. Not even the loans officer at my bank in town”.

Statistics Canada clearly needs to do a far better job of protecting confidentiality of census data in rural areas.

[Agriculture, May 29th, 2001]

Mr. Speaker, the average Saskatchewan farmer earned under $7,000 last year. That does not include any wages or return in equity.

The wheat board minister claims that his government has provided $30 billion of passive farm subsidies. Saskatchewan farmers could not have received much of this passive money. They would like to know how much of this passive phantom money was used for advertising and administration.

[Mining, May 28th, 2001]

Mr. Speaker, it is mining week in Saskatchewan. Mining contributes more than $2 billion to Saskatchewan's gross domestic product annually. Almost 20,000 people are employed either directly or indirectly by the mining industry today.

The total value of Saskatchewan's mineral sales was $2.4 billion last year. Saskatchewan is the world's leading producer and exporter of potash and uranium, accounting for almost 30% of world production in both of these commodities.

The opening of two new uranium mines in northern Saskatchewan and the growing momentum in diamond exploration will contribute to ensuring that mining continues to be a significant contributor to our provincial economy.

I take this opportunity to congratulate everyone involved in the mining industry in Saskatchewan on a wonderful past and a very bright future.