Crucial Fact

  • Their favourite word was farmers.

Last in Parliament October 2000, as Reform MP for Portage—Lisgar (Manitoba)

Lost their last election, in 2000, with 10% of the vote.

Statements in the House

Rights And Freedoms November 18th, 1998

Mr. Speaker, on November 11 Canadians honoured and remembered the sacrifices that veterans made to protect our freedom.

World War II veteran, Stuart Scott, a Radville, Saskatchewan farmer was fined $1,500 on November 6 and was ordered to surrender his 1988 car to Canada Customs for moving four bags of hulless, waxy barley into the U.S. According to Mr. Scott, “While I was fighting for the freedom of my country, my country took my freedom away”.

Students have been pepper sprayed for protesting against a dictator and farmers have been jailed for selling their own grain. History can only judge this government harshly for neglecting to protect the freedom for which so many Canadians fought and died.

Canada Small Business Financing Act November 17th, 1998

Mr. Speaker, it is a pleasure to speak to Bill C-53, an act to increase the availability of financing for small businesses which would not otherwise have access to financing.

You are aware, Mr. Speaker, of what small business is about if I gauge it right. You have been involved in small business and know what is needed to run a small business: financing and capital. I started thinking in layman's terms as far as a farmer is concerned. If you ain't going to make it, why borrow more money and do it? That seems to be the intent of the bill.

There is a saying on the farm that if government helps once we will survive. If it helps twice we will get very sick and if it helps another time we will die. That is possibly what is happening here. If a businessman does not deserve or cannot be provided with financing by somebody, maybe death will be there in the long run anyway.

I do not want to take anything away from entrepreneurs. I give the example of a gentleman that I have known for a number of years. He had some financial problems in his business venture and had to shut it down. He got another idea which he felt was a deserving idea. He required some financing from financial institutions but was turned down time and time again.

I did not realize that this had been going on, but when I saw him he had started a business and was doing fairly well. I asked him where he finally found an institution that would give him financing. He said he never found one but had asked a couple of friends whether they would be part of what he was doing. He found some private money and got started. He was very successful.

I asked him what he had to do to persuade somebody that he was stable enough or entrepreneurial enough to start a business. He said he had to pay 18% interest for the money. That was what he had to do.

He was honest, worked hard and made it. If the money had come easily and he thought if he did not make it the government would back him up, I wonder if he would have put in the same effort and asked other people to advise him or to help him. This is what I am talking about when I say that perhaps government helps too much. It helps us to die, not to survive.

I thought a very interesting comment was made in the House the other day when we were debating the farm crisis on a motion the Reform put forward. A question was asked of the agriculture minister who said that no farmer should be able to farm without getting a job on the outside. That is the type of help the government wants to give to the farming industry. Does it realize it is a small business compared to large manufacturing? That was a rather discouraging answer.

We just heard the hon. member for Selkirk—Interlake talk about some of the fees assessed against farmers. I will point out a very simple illustration on my farm in the last month or so. We grow some very desirable durum which the U.S. likes in its milling industry as far as pasta manufacturing is concerned. As it happened we thrashed the durum and took it into the elevator. It was graded a number 3CW durum which is a fairly good grade for the pasta industry. When we started hauling the durum to the elevator a few pieces of ergot were found in it, which is not desirable at all. It was downgraded it to No. 5 durum. This was a setback to my boys on the farm. It reduced the price of the product and probably would result in their bottom line being even more in the red. They took a sample into the U.S. to be analysed and to see what the Americans would pay for very high quality durum with a bit of ergot in it.

The Americans took a look at it and said they did not mind, that they would take the durum. It was a good idea. We could go to the wheat board and get a buyback. The wheat board would accommodate us and help us get a better price for the durum. The Americans offered us $4.55 for the durum within the same distance of our farm as the Canadian elevator. The initial price is $1.57 for No. 5 durum.

This meant we could triple our income if we could get a licence to export it to the U.S. When we asked the wheat board for that export licence, it wanted to charge us $5.12 for durum which they said was rotten and no good.

This is the way government helps industry and small business. It gets them on their feet then taxes them to death. If our small business had the same type of tax relief as other industries in other countries they would be very viable.

American farmers get a $6 billion tax write-off just because of depressed prices. That would help every farmer in Canada. Not only would it help farmers, but they would have money to spend in rural communities where other small business people would benefit. As well, more taxes would be earned.

This is what we have come to. The government gives the perception that it is doing something that is good for the country when actually it is destroying it with overtaxation, with trying to keep viable industries that probably should never be operating.

I want to be very fair. I would like all businessmen or constituents with the idea of starting their own business to have that opportunity. The best teacher they could have in life is running their own business and being their own boss. It gives them the idea of how many sleepless nights it sometimes takes to earn a feeble living that is maybe less than they would get from the payment of wages in another profession.

A level playing field, an opportunity to work within a system that treats everybody fairly and equally, is a must in democracy. That is why I urge the government to look at tax reduction and to look at creating level playing fields rather than giving handouts which we have seen do not work.

Agriculture November 4th, 1998

Mr. Speaker, the justice department has a double standard when it comes to punishing farmers for selling their wheat outside the Canadian Wheat Board. Dozens of poor farmers who cannot afford high priced lawyers have been prosecuted relentlessly by this Liberal government, but one wealthy farmer who disputed a huge fine has been left alone completely for three years. Is this the justice minister's policy, to only prosecute poor farmers who cannot hire top notch lawyers?

Supply November 3rd, 1998

Mr. Speaker, with all the research being done—and we know costs have to be cut—why is it that the Canadian Wheat Board for the last three or four years has been marketing less and less grain but costs have still gone up about 8% to 10% a year?

Where could we do some cutting in that marketing agency? When prices drop from 40% to 70% for grain, surely there should be some cutbacks instead of continual increases.

Supply November 3rd, 1998

Mr. Speaker, I thank the hon. member for the question.

In 1993 our trade negotiators knew what kind of subsidies we were fighting and what had to be done to get a market that would be fair and provide a level playing field to farmers in North America. That was not done. That was neglected. We were sympathetic to what had to be done. Instead of reducing our subsidies 15%, we reduced them 85%.

Farmers were willing to do that because they knew what the problem was. As long as there was a market and decent prices, we did not complain about losing the extra profit. Today that has to be returned to the farming sector. The unfairness of the deal negotiated by the trade negotiators was not the fault of the farmers. It was the government's fault. The Liberals are the government. We as the opposition can only point out to them what the problem is and what funds are needed.

The government does the books and it has to make sure that the money is somewhere. I do not think farmers care from where it comes, whether it is out of NISA or out of the GRIP program which was dissolved in all three prairie provinces. Farmers have to have some support to tide them over until we get a level playing field and prices improve. And they will.

In 1971 the government gave us $6 an acre to summer fallow and we had a billion bushels of wheat that we could not sell. By 1974 we could not find a kernel of wheat in a granary anywhere because the demand was there. When millions of people are starving to death—

Supply November 3rd, 1998

Mr. Speaker, I appreciate that question from the hon. member.

I want to point out to him that about 60% of my property taxes are education taxes. Part of that comes from the federal government in transfer payments so it does affect me on my property taxes.

Look at the farm input costs on fuel. The tax on that is almost prohibitive not just to the farmers but to the railways and truckers for delivering the product. That is where we can reduce the taxes.

If we were to take away all the hidden taxes I would bet there would not be 10% of the costs. On a combine that costs $130,000 I am told there is only $13,000 of physical property costs in that. The rest is all taxes and labour. We are paying a lot of tax and we are not getting anything in return for it.

Supply November 3rd, 1998

That is another thing. My hon. colleague remarks that we have to buy them from the U.S. in Canadian dollars and we know what they are worth. There is a tragedy out there.

When the American government negotiated at the World Trade Organization meeting it maintained at that time 24% of its subsidies in a green box which is allowable. Our Canadian government only maintained 8%.

That is what is going on in western Canada today. That is what we are dealing with. I do not know what I can say to impress upon people how serious it is.

I came through the crisis in commodity prices in 1969-70 when farmers were forced to sell three bushels of barley for $1. Seventy cents would buy any amount of wheat to put into a feedlot.

When the Liberal government came to power in 1970 or 1971, western farmers asked the Prime Minister who had created a just society to please help them sell their wheat. What happened? He gave them the finger. That is how the Liberal government looks after farmers and agriculture.

I am told here today that the agriculture minister said farmers should not be able to farm as an occupation, that they should have a job off the farm. Is this government trying to create an industry like the one there was in the Soviet Union? People worked at a full day's job and then grew their food. Using a small spade in their gardens they supplied one-third of all the food that was produced in the Soviet Union.

If we want to see what can happen to a country where the farmers are protected and where farming is not profitable, just go over there. Pay them a visit. Today, if the American government does not give that country free grain, people will starve to death because they cannot afford to buy it. That country owes billions of dollars to other countries. That country was number one in 1981 when I visited there. That country was the mightiest power in the world. Because that country did not look after its economy in the local market and its farmers, it is now the world's biggest basket case. From 1912 to 1917 it was the bread basket of Europe. That country has half of the agricultural land in Europe and today it is begging other countries to give it food so people will not starve to death.

That is how serious the situation is in western Canada. The majority of farm families today have one of the partners and in many cases both partners out working. They cannot survive even if they get other jobs. That is why this government has to look at what these farmers need.

The Liberals promised in the 1993 election that they were going to come in with a whole farm support program that would look after us if we had to fight the European subsidies. They have reneged on that. Not only have they reneged on it, but they have also done away with the programs we had. On the NISA program, which they brag about, we were just told today in West Block by witnesses who were appearing that out of 140,000 NISA accounts, 42,000 have less than $1,000 in them.

Young farmers cannot survive today. If we want the young farmers on the unemployment line, they will be there. Very soon it will not just be Case or Flexi-Coil that shut down their lines of production. There will be shutdowns in other industries.

If we want to have people stay in their jobs not just in the farming industry, it is important that we make the farm viable. Today in western Canada 45% of all jobs have some link to agriculture. If that is not maintained, the $7 billion surplus in the EI fund will be eaten up and will disappear.

The government has a choice. It should help make farmers viable and give them support until the markets again give them a chance to operate on their own. Tax relief is important. When I look at the taxes I pay on my property and I lose anywhere from $30 to $50 an acre, that is unfair. That should not be happening.

Supply November 3rd, 1998

Mr. Speaker, this is an interesting debate as the debates usually are when we talk about agriculture. It is a very sad day when we get up in the House and talk about the problems on farms. Our producers put food on the tables of everybody in Canada and supply that same commodity to millions of people around the world. It is not just a tragedy but a crime that they cannot maintain a lifestyle where they can put food on their own tables.

I will tell the House of the kinds of subsidies we farmers have to put up with. The European farmer gets $175 an acre to sow his crop and grow it. That is right off the start. Then he is guaranteed that if there is a surplus they will at least pay $2 a bushel to the exporter to get rid of the product. That is what Canadian farmers are dealing with. It is disastrous out there in farmland today.

When the World Trade Organization was negotiating, our trade negotiators agreed to a 15% reduction in subsidies on farms. That is what everybody was supposed to follow. We reduced subsidies by 85%. We gave them an unlevel playing field that would break every single farmer in western Canada. This put the feed prices down to such a level that every farmer who had a buck went into a livestock operation. Governments encouraged that. Today the hog industry in Saskatchewan alone is losing $20 million every six months. How long do we think that industry can survive? It is impossible.

I was astounded when I picked up a paper with a backgrounder about what was going on. The Canadian Wheat Board suddenly realized that they are the lowest prices in the last four years. Where was this organization in 1995-96 when prices were the highest in the world? Instead of selling our grain the board allowed it to back up in our bins. It had a million bushels of wheat left over which was more wheat than it had the previous year.

Finally Mr. Beswick got fed up with this type of marketing and quit. He told western Canadian farmers that in the last year the board had lost western barley producers $180 million. That kind of marketing system does not work. The wheat board is there for a purpose. It is supposed to get us the best price, not the worst price. That is why farmers are in trouble. Did the Liberals know about this? I think they did. I think they had a policy in 1993.

No matter what happens with commodity prices, the Americans and the Europeans are going to look after their farmers. This is what the Americans have done so far. They just passed a bill that will give $3 billion in market losses to farmers in the U.S. They have agreed that law makers will give a tax break worth around $4 billion for farmers and small businesses.

The hon. gentleman from Brandon—Souris said farmers do not pay any taxes. I paid my property taxes last week. Grain prices in wheat and barley markets have been dropping by 40% to 70% but my property taxes have gone up by 9%. That is what happened to my input costs. That is what we are dealing with. Not only that, but look at the parts prices. If we want to fix a combine, a tractor, a lawnmower, the prices have escalated to points where we just cannot afford to operate these things any more.

Agriculture October 26th, 1998

Mr. Speaker, I am sure glad and assured that the minister looks after the law. The judge who handed out the cruel sentence to this Lethbridge farmer has a son who was convicted of robbing a casino at knife point in 1996. He received nothing but a suspended sentence.

A knife wielding robber gets a suspended sentence but the robber's father hands out a huge fine or a jail term to a farmer for selling—

Agriculture October 26th, 1998

Mr. Speaker, in 1996 a Lethbridge farmer was sentenced to a $4,000 fine or six months in jail for taking $5 worth of wheat across the border.

Today 29 farmers are going to court in Regina for doing nothing more than exporting their own grain. They did not want to sell it to Ottawa's wheat board. Now they are faced with going to jail.

Why is the justice minister seeking such cruel punishment for nothing more than a farmer selling his own grain?