Bev Shipley

[Canada-Colombia Free Trade Agreement Implementation Act, September 29th, 2009]

Mr. Speaker, when we talk about human rights, we are very fortunate within Canada to have such a high standard of human rights, protection of workers, protection of families and protection of our individuals, because our democracy has allowed that.

In terms of why we sign these agreements, I would like to read a couple of quotes into the record, if I may.

The government's efforts to strengthen the rule of law, mainly through increasing regional state presence in locations previously under the control of illegal armed groups....

This comes from the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights. I have a number of those. What is really important to the democratic forum is that we actually work with these countries through these agreements to help them improve their human rights.

[Canada-Colombia Free Trade Agreement Implementation Act, September 29th, 2009]

Mr. Speaker, it has been interesting listening, as we have gone through some of the discussions today, to the NDP members and their politics about not trading. They seem to want to circle the wagons within our own country. They oppose any agreement on trade that would give our manufacturers, our industry and our agricultural community any benefits from reaching out and having trade agreements with other countries.

We make trade agreements that are beneficial to both countries. Colombia does not have the same standards of living that Canada has. We are very blessed and fortunate in this great country. We have been able to move ahead in a collegial movement, working on win-win discussions and negotiations with countries that have not had the opportunity to trade into Canada, so we can give them the goods and services and the investment that they need within their country to help them raise their standards.

Why did I talk about the agreement with Colombia in comparison to other trade agreements that we have? We have historical data, but I think it is always important to use good agreements that benefit all the countries with which we have them, as reinforcement to show where we have been able to move ahead on this great agreement with Colombia.

I suspect that NDP members across the way have said that they do not support any agreement. They do not support any movement ahead by Canada in terms of being able to export. That is just amazing, because we are a country with minerals, natural resources and agriculture in abundance that we cannot deal with ourselves.

It is always important that we develop great trade agreements. The Conservative government is the only one that has been able to reach out with these agreements, not just the multinational ones covered by the European discussions, but also the bipartite ones.

I would hope that when the time comes, the hon. members across the way would actually change their mind and come on side and help us to move Canada ahead in this free trade agreement, which is good for both countries, Colombia and Canada.

[Canada-Colombia Free Trade Agreement Implementation Act, September 29th, 2009]

Mr. Speaker, it is a pleasure to resume the debate on this important issue. As we start to wind down towards the end of this debate, I can say that it is a privilege to stand here, along with many who have spoken on this particular subject, discussing C-23, An Act to implement the Free Trade Agreement between Canada and the Republic of Colombia, the Agreement on the Environment between Canada and the Republic of Colombia and the Agreement on Labour Cooperation between Canada and the Republic of Colombia.

This is an important agreement for Canadian businesses. Clearly it will have broad-reaching benefits not only for those in my riding of Lambton—Kent—Middlesex but for those in ridings across this country, particularly ridings that are involved in manufacturing, industry, primary production in mining and oil, and other areas.

This is only a small part of the Conservative government's broader trade agenda. As countries cope with the global economic downturn, protectionist elements like the United States' buy American policies that are emerging are unfortunate. These are the same kinds of policies that plunged the world into the Great Depression in the 1930s.

Canada is setting an example. We are not only opposing protectionism, we are leading the way to recovery. In fact we heard that earlier today in question period. We are also doing that by pursuing an aggressive trade agenda, a trade agenda in the Americas, Europe, India, the Middle East and China.

In fact, over the last four years our Conservative government has opened doors to Canadian businesses by signing new free trade agreements with Colombia, Peru, Jordan, Panama and the European Free Trade Association states of Iceland, Norway, Switzerland and Liechtenstein.

We are not just focusing on smaller bilateral agreements, we have been busy launching discussions on comprehensive economic partnerships with two of the world's largest economic powerhouses, the European Union and India. Once negotiated, these agreements will mean billions of dollars of new business for the Canadian economy. These agreements will help expand trade, open doors for Canadian exporters, encourage economic growth and create jobs.

When we look at the past, prior to our Conservative government, there were only three agreements in 13 years. As part of a trading nation, Canadian businesses understand the significance and quite honestly the importance of trade and trade agreements. If we compare our record to that of the past Liberal government, the contrast could not be starker.

Let us take a look at some of that record. For the Americas, as part of this government's strategy, we have signed new free trade agreements with Peru, Colombia and Panama. We have also initiated trade agreements and talks with the CARICOM group of countries, about 17 of the Caribbean countries, and a round of negotiations will start in the coming months.

We are also focused on expanding our relationship with South America's largest economy, Brazil. That is why the Minister of International Trade has opened new trade offices, to open doors for trading companies in that market. In 2008, our exports to Brazil totalled $2.6 billion, an increase of an incredible 70% over the year before. Our commercial relationship continues to grow.

Let us take a look at another one, Europe. In Europe Canada has concluded a free trade agreement with the European Free Trade Association states of Iceland, Norway, Switzerland and Liechtenstein. The agreement came into effect on July 1 of this year and it is already benefiting Canadian exporters.

I am also happy to note that we have initiated free trade agreements with the European Union. This is an historic initiative that has the potential to boost the Canadian economy by about $12 billion. That, in one initiative, is an incredible boost to our economy.

Let us take a look at India, and maybe a little later at China.

We have heard some of the grandiose speeches, quite honestly, by the Liberal opposition about expanding trade with India and China. Actually, those are just speeches. What we have done is take action. This is ironic, given the record of the Liberal Party.

In the 1990s, the Liberals pursued a policy of isolation toward India because they did not agree with India's decisions regarding its national security. The effect of this Liberal policy was to marginalize Canada's influence for nearly a decade.

Our government has taken steps to re-engage with India, as we have had to do with many countries around the world, for many agreements and with many trade markets to get them back.

We have already lost negotiations on a comprehensive economic partnership agreement that has a huge potential to increase bilateral trade.

Discussions are also under way for a nuclear cooperation agreement between Canada and India.

Furthermore, the Minister of International Trade just last week opened new trade offices in Gujarat, in addition to the offices we opened in Hyderabad and Kolkata. This fulfills another campaign commitment and expands Canada's network to eight trade offices in India. We have created one of Canada's most extensive trade networks anywhere in the world.

Now I would move, just for a minute before I wrap up, to China, because we have also been making impressive gains in our commercial relationship over the last little while, particularly, in the past few years. Consider that China is now Canada's second-largest merchandise trading partner. We have opened six new trade offices in China, under the global commerce strategy. Never before has there been a serious initiative to expand Canadian benefits through trade with China. We are putting a lot of work into building relationships with the decision makers.

In addition to the regular meetings between the Prime Minister and President Hu at international fora, there has also been a steady flow of visits by Canadian ministers. In fact, if we go back, we will find that since 2006 there have been over 14 ministerial delegations that have gone on trade missions and ministerial visits to China.

Finally, let us move now, just for a minute, to the Middle East. We cannot forget the significance of the Middle East as a trading partner. We recently signed a free trade agreement, a foreign investment protection agreement and a nuclear cooperation agreement with Jordan. Further discussions have been launched and aim at a free trade agreement with Morocco.

In conclusion, at this time of an economic downturn, Canadians can count on our government, but we also ask to have the cooperation of all the parties as we try to oppose the protectionism that has been put about by some of our trading partners and our neighbours and as we defend free and open trade on a world stage.

[Petitions, June 19th, 2009]

Madam Speaker, I am pleased to present a petition in the House today signed by constituents in my riding and Canadians from across the country. The petition supports the thousands of people who were on the Hill not very long ago for the March for Life.

The petitioners call upon Parliament to pass legislation for the protection of human life from the time of conception until natural death.

[Petitions, June 1st, 2009]

Mr. Speaker, it is a privilege today to present a petition on behalf of my constituents in Lambton—Kent—Middlesex. It comes to be that whereas Canada is a country which respects human rights and includes in the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms that everyone has a right to life and whereas it has been 40 years, in May 1969, when Parliament changed the law to permit abortions and since 1998 has had no law to protect the lives of the unborn child. Therefore, the petitioners call upon Parliament to pass legislation for the protection of human life from the time of conception until natural death.

[Business of Supply, May 14th, 2009]

Mr. Chair, the minister just touched on this at the end of his response, which is the independent investigation and Ms. Weatherall. There has been some discussion over her selection, particularly by members of the opposition party who tried to discredit her credibility and the work she is doing. They have tried to discredit the minister as being interfering but then, in the next turn, say that the minister will not talk to her or has not talked to her.

In fact, over the last few days opposition members have said that they are actually on a fishing trip. I think what Canadians want is for Ms. Weatherall to have the opportunity to come forward with her recommendations and get to the bottom of this situation that came about last August. I am wondering if the minister could help Canadians and those of us here understand the credibility and the qualifications that this lady has to bring to that investigation.

[Business of Supply, May 14th, 2009]

Mr. Chair, I appreciate the opportunity to speak tonight.

I want to begin by giving the minister a well-deserved thanks from not only my constituents in Lambton—Kent—Middlesex but from those in this great country of Canada.

I want to take the opportunity to speak a bit about the listeriosis outbreak that happened in August 2008. First, I will put forward a few facts about what happened.

Regardless of where we are in this House, a tragedy happened and, in all fairness, our thoughts and prayers go out to the families and friends of those who have been affected by that outbreak.

In terms of the listeria, it is important to understand that the Canadian food safety system is a multi-faceted system, extending over several government departments and agencies and through provincial and municipal governments.

No single arm of government acts alone in situations like the listeriosis outbreak we experienced last summer. An effective response requires first-class systems, flawless collaboration and communication between various agencies and across jurisdictions. Certainly the listeriosis outbreak of 2008 informed the government that it needed to strengthen its policies and its activities around the issues of listeria in food and the health risks it poses to Canadians.

There were also lessons to be learned about providing a tightly integrated response when several organizations at different levels of government need to coordinate with each other.

I will give a brief timeline of the events of last summer related to this outbreak. I will follow that by letting members know what the Canadian Food Inspection Agency, which I will refer to as CFIA, and its government partners have done since to strengthen our food safety system with regard to listeria.

When the outbreak was identified by the Public Health Agency of Canada last summer, CFIA worked closely with the agency, Health Canada, provincial authorities, local units of public health and the private sector.

CFIA was first apprised of the situation on August 6, 2008. It was only then that the Toronto Public Health Unit informed the CFIA of two listeriosis illness cases at a Toronto nursing home. It also had preliminary lab results indicating listeria present in the food that had been served at that same location.

From that point onward, CFIA's Office of Food Safety and Recall led around-the-clock food safety investigations to see if there was a link between the listeriosis illness in Toronto and any commercially distributed food.

During the food safety investigation, CFIA worked with its partners at the federal, provincial and public health unit levels, collecting evidence that allowed them to make the link between the contaminated food and the listeriosis illness.

Early on August 17, 2008, based on information and guidance provided by CFIA, Maple Leaf Foods started to a recall on ready-to-eat meat products produced at that plant. Additional food safety investigations resulted in an expanded voluntary recall of other products from the very same plant. The recall for this outbreak represents one of the largest in recent Canadian history.

In addition to its magnitude, the recall was complex, requiring an extensive effort with respect to product traceability and coordination with government partners and industry.

The process involved included: a sampling blitz, with some 348 sample units being tests; 192 Maple Leaf products recalled; and approximately 30,000 recall effectiveness checks completed nationwide. I think that in itself indicates the complexity of what a recall involves.

CFIA conducted operational reviews after the listeriosis outbreak of 2008. Many aspects of the agency's response were reviewed, including how it communicated and coordinated internally. It also analyzed its collaboration with federal partners, other levels of government and industry. It reviewed how it engaged with the Canadian public and the industry.

Beyond communication and coordination, the agency also reviewed its activities at the Maple Leaf plant at Bartor Road. It reviewed inspection records and actions prior to the outbreak and its subsequent investigative activities there.

As the House may be aware, both CFIA and Maple Leaf investigations pinpointed biological material deep inside the slicers at plant 97B as breeding grounds for listeria as the root cause for the outbreak. As soon as this was confirmed, CFIA immediately gave directives to industry for new deep sanitizing procedures for slicers and has subsequently introduced mandatory environmental testing for listeria.

What many Canadians might not know is that Canada used to have a mandatory environmental testing regime prior to 2005. In that year, when the member for Malpeque was parliamentary secretary to the minister of agriculture and the member for St. Paul's was the minister of state for the Public Health Agency of Canada in the last government, environmental testing was cut. It was simply put to an end.

We learned from Michael McCain last month at the subcommittee that despite the Liberal government's cancellation of mandatory environmental testing for listeria, Maple Leaf was taking voluntary tests. Mr. McCain testified that Maple Leaf had some positive listeria tests results beginning in May 2008, leading up to the outbreak in August of 2008.

Under the law then there was no legal obligation to report these results to CFIA. It simply filed the results away in a binder.

I want to read what Dr. Brian Evans, Canada's chief veterinary officer, told our subcommittee on listeria what this resulted in. In his opening remarks about environmental testing, he said:

This is important, because looking at aggregate environmental tests over a period of time will provide us with early warning of potential problems so that corrective actions can be taken before a positive test is found in food.

Dr. Evans was very clear that with a history of positive environmental tests, CFIA may have been able to determine problems before something went wrong. It may not have known the specific cause of what was wrong but it would have been in a position to investigate proactively rather than during an outbreak.

Simply put, without reporting the test results to CFIA, the regulatory agency could not have foreseen the tragic outbreak of last year.

All witnesses have agreed that if Maple Leaf's positive environmental test results had been communicated to CFIA prior to July 2008, alarm bells would have rung and this outbreak may have been prevented.

Yes, environmental testing for listeria was eliminated in 2005. Thankfully, however, our Minister of Agriculture and Agri-Food and Minister for the Canadian Wheat Board has taken steps to undo the mistake of the previous government and has ordered that environmental testing and reporting for listeria become mandatory.

The Conservative government has initiated a stringent environmental testing regime which is now mandatory for industry and CFIA to test and analyze results immediately. These regulations became effect April 1.

I have a question that I would like to put to the minister, if I may. After hearing the results of what happened and understanding a bit about the complexity of it, I believe it is imperative that the minister tell the House and Canadians what our government has done and what steps we have taken to help restore the confidence in food safety in this great country.

[Agricultural Loans, May 11th, 2009]

Mr. Speaker, I rise today on behalf of new farmers and young farmers in my riding of Lambton--Kent--Middlesex to commend my colleague, the Minister of Agriculture, for introducing the Canadian agricultural loans bill.

Since being elected, I have been privileged to conduct a number of round table meetings with all sectors of agriculture that have provided me with important input on issues. I have heard consistently from young farmers about the challenges they face in trying to carry on the family farm.

The Canadian agricultural loans bill would allow young farmers entering the farming business and intergenerational farmers hoping to take over the family farm the opportunity to access loans of up to $500,000. These significant changes were not available under the previous program.

This is yet another example of our government's commitment to the agriculture industry and to new farmers, and our recognition of its importance to Canada.

[Canadian Agricultural Loans Act, May 11th, 2009]

Mr. Speaker, the member talked about farming and debt but I wonder if he has looked at the financial situation of Canadian farmers in 2009.

Rather than just talking about debt, it is more important to talk about debt to asset ratio, which has risen over the last 10 years by three-quarters of 1%. All of us have incurred debt over the last number of years but inflation and the cost of living has driven some of that.

I wonder if the member has ever looked at the debt to asset ratio which is really the important factor in terms of assessing the debt of farmers.

[Canadian Agricultural Loans Act, May 11th, 2009]

We want an unbiased opinion.