Peter Adams

[Agriculture, October 12th, 2004]

Madam Chair, it is directly opposed to the Standing Orders to make a remark of that type, particularly when the member is here virtually by himself. I hope that you advise the member of that. I suspect he does not understand, but in regard to the fact that he is here on his own I understand he is very courageous in mentioning some of the numbers.

[Resumption of Debate on Address in Reply, October 8th, 2004]

Mr. Speaker, I listened with great interest to my colleague. I noticed that he mentioned the Kyoto accord. I know of his great interest in that accord. As he knows, Russia has now signed on to the Kyoto accord, which is important first because it means the Kyoto accord is now legal, or whatever the expression is around the world, and second, because the largest polar nation has now signed on to it, which is very special for us in Canada.

He also knows that Canada signed on to the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea in the spring of the year. That also affects the north and the Arctic Ocean because it affects the way we treat our offshore areas, as well as, by the way, our involvement with fish on the high seas and so on.

I heard he was not satisfied and he thinks that Kyoto should be strengthened in Canada. I agree with him, but I wonder what he thinks about the fact that the vast majority of the proceeds of the Petro-Canada sale are to go to environmental technologies. Second, I wonder what he thinks about the renewed emphasis on the north in the Speech from the Throne, which I think ties in with both Kyoto and the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea.

[Resumption of Debate on Address in Reply, October 8th, 2004]

Mr. Speaker, I rise on a point of order. I thought the presence or absence of members in the House was not an appropriate topic for discussion.

[Resumption of Debate on Address in Reply, October 8th, 2004]

Time. Time. Question. Question.

[Agriculture, October 7th, 2004]

Mr. Chair, I appreciate my colleague opposite raising the matter of traceability. I hope the minister will bear in mind that in Peterborough there is a DNA cluster which deals with human and animal DNA. I am advised that we no longer need tags and we do not need chip implants: all that is necessary is the registration at birth of an animal and then it is possible by scanners to trace the animal for the rest of its life. I hope the minister will take that into account and that when we go to traceability we go to the best available technology.

On the matter of slaughter capacity, in Ontario we need a capacity of 1,500 to 2,000 animals a day. I know the department is working on it, but as the department is working on it I hope the minister will consider small, regional abattoirs built to the highest possible standards, which can take not only beef but sheep and other livestock. In the long term, I think, such small, regional abattoirs would benefit us, and not just locally; in the end, they would be very acceptable to the international market.

[Committees of the House, May 13th, 2004]

Mr. Speaker, I also would ask for unanimous consent to move that the 26th report of the Standing Committee on Procedure and House Affairs dealing with security on Parliament Hill, presented on Wednesday, April 28, be concurred in.

[Committees of the House, May 13th, 2004]

Mr. Speaker, I move that the 19th report of the Standing Committee on Procedure and House Affairs dealing with security on Parliament Hill, presented on Thursday, April 22, be concurred in.

(Motion agreed to)

[Standing Orders, May 13th, 2004]

Mr. Speaker, I think you would find there is unanimous consent for me to move a motion to correct a discrepancy in the Standing Orders regarding the scrutiny of regulations.

The amendment would delete the words “after the notice is transferred” and substitute the words “after the report is presented pursuant to Standing Order 123(1)”.

Therefore, I move:

That Standing Order 124 be amended to read as follows:

“124. Except as otherwise provided in any Standing or Special Order of the House, when a notice of a resolution given pursuant to Standing Order 123(5) is transferred to the Order Paper under “Motions”, it shall be deemed to have been moved and adopted by the House at the ordinary hour of daily adjournment on the fifteenth sitting day after the report is presented pursuant to Standing Order 123(1), unless a motion for which notice has been given pursuant to Standing Order 54, standing in the name of a Minister, to the effect that the resolution not be adopted, has been placed on the Order Paper”.

[Excise Tax Act, May 12th, 2004]

Mr. Speaker, the parliamentary secretary has addressed some of my concerns, but I urge the government to use every means at its disposal to address this matter. This is something that affects our entire economy, that affects every household in Canada, every Canadian.

Also, it is not just a matter of money. It is something that affects the self-confidence and comfort of people in their everyday lives, getting to work, getting the children to school, and getting out on weekends. It hits those on fixed incomes, especially seniors, very hard.

Most countries are helplessly in the power of the oil companies. We, as an oil producing nation, are not. We should be able to protect our citizens from the worst excesses of oil price fluctuations.

While in the short run, decreasing dependence on overseas oil and increasing dependence on our own oil resources, the government should continue with its efforts, through Kyoto and other provinces, to decrease dependence on oil itself.

[Excise Tax Act, May 12th, 2004]

Mr. Speaker, I thank the industry minister for trying to answer my question about gas prices but the time available in question period was not enough for either of us to fully express ourselves. I look forward to a more complete response from the parliamentary secretary.

This is a matter that I and other MPs from eastern Ontario have raised before. For years we have received calls about oil companies jerking around consumers. People notice that prices go up before weekends, especially long weekends. This is important in a tourist area like eastern Ontario. Prices go up suddenly but they come down slowly over a period of days. Prices seem to rise and fall at all gas stations at the same time. People want to know how it is that gas, which is already in the tanks at the station, can change in price like that. My constituents see excess profit taking, price gouging and collusion in these patterns.

I have raised my constituents concerns on such matters in the House before. The Liberal member for Pickering—Ajax—Uxbridge and the Liberal committee on gas pricing in Canada worked hard to hold oil companies accountable. We pushed for public inquiries but they invariably showed no collusion and the pricing practices continued.

People want to know why we do not compensate for the excessive gas price hikes by lower federal taxes. I point out that the federal share of taxes is lower than the provincial share and that the federal excise tax is fixed; it does not go up with the price. The GST portion of the tax does increase with price but there are rebates for low income people, farmers, school bus operators, truckers, municipalities and others. We successfully lobbied for a home heating rebate a few years ago.

However the trick here is to lower taxes without providing a windfall profit for oil companies. Gas selling for 90¢ this week can be sold for the same price next week with or without tax. How do we prevent the tax difference going to the oil companies?

Also, it has been pointed out to us federal MPs that price control is a provincial jurisdiction and that the few provinces that have tried gas price control have seen negative effects on their economies.

However Canada is a major oil producer and net exporter of oil. Taxpayer money has been used and is being used to stimulate and support that industry.

While I can see that Canadian consumers do not need protection when world prices are reasonable, surely there is something we can do to protect them from sudden and unreasonable price changes. We are told that the current price increase is driven by a huge surge in world prices resulting from the Iraq war and troubled times in the Middle East. Most Canadians can accept that, but the member for Pickering—Ajax—Uxbridge calculates that the current world price for oil should have resulted in prices in the 80¢ per litre range not the $1 per litre range that is being experienced in various parts of the country.

Why should Canadians who have invested in their domestic oil industry be subjected to price gouging like this?

I look forward to the parliamentary secretary's reply on behalf of the minister with great interest.