Bev Shipley

[Veterans Affairs, November 14th, 2007]

Mr. Speaker, Canadians know that our government is truly committed to Canada's veterans and their families. These families deserve to be treated with the respect and the dignity they have earned. All Canadians know this and we know this.

As a result, could the Minister of Veterans Affairs please tell the House what action has been taken to deal with the case of Annie MacKenzie, which has been widely covered in many of the newspapers?

[Controlled Drugs and Substances Act, June 14th, 2007]

Mr. Speaker, it is a pleasure to support my colleague, the member for Peace River, on his great bill, Bill C-428.

Crystal meth use and production is a serious and growing problem in Canada. Unfortunately, regardless of where we are living in this great country of Canada, we are starting to see the effects of it in all of our communities.

My riding of Lambton—Kent—Middlesex is in southwestern Ontario. It is a rural riding, made up of small towns and mostly agriculture. Yet, as much as we have been able to control the use of it, we know that it infiltrates and it impacts our youth within our communities across the country.

As encountered in some of the United States, a rise of crystal meth use in Canada has been accompanied by an increase in related health problems and death among its users. The resulting emotional, financial and social costs are enormous.

I will look at four different areas: first, health effects; second, law enforcement; third, production; and, finally, the effect that it has on our communities.

First, the health effects of crystal, even taken in small amounts, can result in increased wakefulness and physical activity, decreased appetite, increased respiration and heart rate, irregular heartbeat, increased blood pressure and hypothermia. Other effects of crystal meth abuse may include anxiety, insomnia, confusion, tremors, convulsions, cardiovascular collapse and in some cases even death.

The long term effects, because this is not only about what happens the day people take this product into their system, include paranoia, aggressiveness, extreme anorexia, memory loss, visual and auditory hallucinations, delusions and serious dental problems.

A few months ago my local newspaper printed a picture of a very attractive young lady. A picture of the same lady a few years later showed the visual effects of what intense drug use had done to that beautiful woman, not only to her facial features but her teeth and all the things that go with it. It was unbelievable that it had such detrimental effects.

Also, the transmission of HIV and hepatitis B and C can be a consequence of crystal meth abuse. Among abusers who inject the drug, infection with HIV and other infectious diseases is spread mainly through the use of contaminated syringes, needles and other injection equipment by more than one person.

Crystal meth abuse may worsen the progression of HIV and its consequences. Studies with meth abusers who have HIV indicate that the HIV causes greater neuronal injury and cognitive impairment compared to HIV-positive people who do not use this drug.

The intoxicating effects of crystal meth, however, whether it is injected or take in other ways, can alter judgment and inhibition and lead people to engage in unsafe and unpredictable behaviours.

The quality of life among users and dealers of crystal meth is greatly diminished. Addicts and dealers may experience dissolution of relationships, social isolation, altered personality, difficulty with academics, loss of employment, involvement in crime, drug-related psychosis and brain damage and health risk behaviours, including risky sexual encounters and declining physical fitness. Furthermore, individuals may not be motivated to seek help as meth users seemingly can create unbelievably high levels of energy and productivity.

I want to switch now for a minute about the legal part and the law enforcement of it. We continually hear police report increased levels of crime in communities where crystal meth is prevalent. We read in the paper about deaths. High speed pursuits, property crimes and identity thefts are associated with meth use. Many of these crimes are committed in pursuit of funds to sustain their consumption.

However, some crimes appear to be as a result of the state of the meth user after consuming the drug. Then once they have consumed the drug, they get involved in dangerous driving, vandalism, assault and threatening behaviour, usually against the most innocent people.

Police frequently report that the illicit drug use, trafficking and production are associated with violence and offences using firearms. Meth use is linked to an increased tendency to commit violent crimes, both because of the need to support the habit and as a result the cognitive changes that result in an individual from consuming these drugs.

Disorderly and disruptive behaviour by meth users have been a concern to communities, which report that the quality of life has decreased as the number of users increase. As noted earlier, meth users are likely to be erratic, paranoid, aggressive, brazen, energetic and then worst of all violent.

How does this stuff come about? How do we make it? What happens? Is it only these large labs? Does it happen at home? My understanding is meth recipes are, unfortunately, easy to obtain from cooks and other resources, including the Internet. There are many non-essential chemicals that can be used interchangeably to produce meth. These include acids, bases and solvents. These are all dangerous chemicals unless handled in a proper fashion.

It amazes me when I look at the bottles and containers this stuff comes in, which these cooks put together to make crystal meth, why anyone would ever want to go down that road of injecting these poisons into their bodies.

There are two different types of clandestine drug labs. One is the economic based labs or the super labs which are large, highly organized and can produce a few hundred grams to 50 kilograms in one production cycle. The other type is the small labs often referred to, as we do with many things, as the mom and pop type or the addiction based labs. These labs generally manufacture small amounts, one to four ounces of meth per production cycle. These operators typically produce enough drugs for themselves and some of their close associates and then have enough money left over to sustain their habit.

One of the problems associated with meth labs is the difficulty in detecting where these labs are located. Therefore, the number of labs already detected in Canada may not accurately reflect the existing problem that is out there.

I will talk about our communities for a minute. Meth labs use and production also have a major social impact on our communities. They can become vulnerable to petty crime, social disorder, risk of health, increase in violence, large scale labs and drug trafficking. Meth labs also pose serious public safety and health hazards to those in and around production operations. They produce environmental hazards, toxic fumes and from to time the potential for explosions.

In wrapping up, staff and students in schools may face users with behavioural problems, classroom disruptions, absenteeism, negative peer influence and, once again, possible contamination and the stress of having insufficient resources known to handle these issues because of the drug.

I cannot say enough about my concern as a parent, and now a grandparent, of what happens when our young people and professional people get involved in this. Therefore, I thank my colleague, the member for Peace River for bringing this forward. I know each and every one of us in the House will support it.

I thank my colleague from Peace River for bringing this bill forward. I know that each and every one of us across this House will support it.

[Outstanding Citizens, May 30th, 2007]

Mr. Speaker, great leaders and great organizations often come together to make a real difference in a community.

Tomorrow evening the Wallaceburg Chamber of Commerce will honour Mari Cole as its citizen of the year. Mari is a member of the hospital auxiliary and a founding member of the local child care centre. She is actively involved in minor sports, physician recruitment and the Wallaceburg Trails Association. Congratulations Mari.

Also, this past Saturday evening the Wallaceburg Kinsmen Club celebrated its 75th anniversary and awarded only its seventh honorary life membership to Mr. Mike Childs.

Mike Childs died in February 2005 at the age of 45. During his all too short life, Mike was a leader in the Kinsmen Club and was a driving force behind virtually every community project in Wallaceburg. Mike's passing is still deeply felt by the citizens of Wallaceburg.

I ask the House to join me in recognizing two outstanding citizens, Mari Cole and the late Mike Childs.

[The Environment, May 9th, 2007]

Mr. Speaker, today is a smog day in most of southern Ontario and it is only the beginning of May.

Sadly, the Liberal leader does not think that we have a problem. He has said that our air is one of the cleanest to be found in a developed country. Tell that to my constituents in Lambton—Kent—Middlesex in southwestern Ontario.

Could the Minister of the Environment tell the House about the detrimental changes by the Liberal Party to Bill C-30 when it comes to clean air?

[Agriculture, April 27th, 2007]

Mr. Speaker, yesterday the environment minister announced Canada's new Conservative government was turning the corner with a plan to reduce greenhouse gases and air pollution. What a great announcement that was.

Could the Secretary of State for Agriculture tell the House how Canada's new government is helping our farmers seize the opportunities of the new eco-economy and contribute to Canada's efforts to improve our environment?

[Dairy Industry, February 23rd, 2007]

Mr. Speaker, dairy farmers and producers in my riding fully support the decision of Canada's new government to launch article XXVIII of GATT to restrict imports of milk protein concentrates.

Dairy farmers have been asking for action and our government is delivering results. What the Liberals failed to do while they were in power, Canada's new government is listening and taking effective steps to support them.

CFA president, Mr. Bob Friesen, said, “This is very good news for Canadian dairy producers...And more than that, it shows this government is still strongly committed to measures that support our vital marketing tools like supply management”. Mr. Jacques Laforge, president of the Dairy Farmers of Canada, added, “There should be no doubt in producers' minds about this government's support for supply management” and that we brought “good news” to dairy farmers.

I would like to join with the dairy producers of Canada in congratulating the Minister of Agriculture for his bold and decisive actions and for delivering on our commitment to the dairy industry and supply management.

[Business of Supply, February 20th, 2007]

Mr. Speaker, in the time I have I will reiterate what the Conservative government did in the last budget, which the NDP did not support and which really surprised me. We had tax cuts for the most vulnerable, those with the lowest incomes, and that took 650,000 people off the tax roll. Those are not the people at the top end. Those are the folks at the lower end who have low incomes.

We did more in one budget to help the poor in the country than the last government did over the last four or five years.

[Business of Supply, February 20th, 2007]

Mr. Speaker, I know the member's concern and his passion about people living in poverty.

I want to talk to him a little bit about the universal child care program that is for everyone. It is $100 a month for every child under six. That reaches out to every family, regardless of their status in Canada, regardless of their financial situation. It allows, what we believe in this country, the fundamental basic values of families where they make the choice of child care, not those in institutions hired by bureaucracies to run them. We believe in families.

I also want to help out a little in terms of the last budget. In our last budget there were $20 billion in tax cuts over the next four or five years and 650,000 people off the tax roles. That is amazing. That is what we are doing as the Conservative government to help out those on low incomes.

[Business of Supply, February 20th, 2007]

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to take part in the debate on this motion. Poverty is a complex issue for governments to deal with. It is much simpler for individuals who have to deal with it in their daily lives. For them it often comes down to survival. We as Conservatives in the new government recognize that life in today's Canada has to be much better than this.

The new government understands the need to take action on poverty. While we have a remarkable economy and 30 year highs in employment levels, we like all members of the House, want to ensure that all Canadians share in the benefits of this strong economy.

Canadians believe in people. Believing in people means helping our neighbours. Lending a hand is of tremendous importance to Canadians. This is especially so in my riding of Lambton—Kent—Middlesex and in rural Canada in general.

One of the things I have noted in following the debate is how little attention is being paid to rural Canada in the discussion of this motion. Rural Canada counts for a significant amount of the nation's wealth yet we still face our challenges. Perhaps it is because rural Canadians bear their burden with a quiet dignity and are often overlooked.

This motion touches on issues which affect rural Canadians also. Thank goodness the new government did not wait for motions like this to be debated before it began to take action.

It is important to acknowledge the work of Senator Segal just down the hall. He has observed that it is necessary for all levels of government to work together to address this issue. He calls for strategic investment, regulatory modernization, and labour force development to provide rural Canadians, especially those in the agriculture sector, with opportunities to take part in Canada's long term prosperity.

Rural poverty is something that needs attention. Poverty in rural Canada and indeed rural Canadians generally were ignored over the past 13 years of Liberal government. Liberals sat by and did nothing as BSE forced farmers into bankruptcy. They watched as CAIS was failing farmers.

Perhaps the most memorable thing the Liberals did in rural Canada was not for farmers but to farmers, where they jailed those who were simply looking to make a living by selling their grain. That is not a plan to combat poverty.

Conservatives and the new government understand that addressing the challenges of rural poverty requires thinking that goes beyond the mandate of a single ministry. This is a challenge that calls for a collaborative effort.

The Prime Minister and the new government are taking steps to get out of the silos that are sometimes built around programs and institutions. For instance, we have a rural secretariat which is situated in the Department of Agriculture and Agri-Food but which works alongside other federal departments and with our provincial partners. The secretariat is helping to develop a more comprehensive understanding of issues concerning rural Canadians including poverty.

It is easy to allow walls to be built around departments. It takes real leadership to recognize those walls and break them down. That is what we have in this Prime Minister. The government is breaking down the walls between programs and policies that affect rural Canadians be they economic, social, environmental or cultural.

We want a government that recognizes the needs of rural Canadians. More importantly, we want a government that takes action when it is required. I would like to take a moment to look at what Canada's new government has been doing to address rural issues and poverty.

The government brought an end to the decade old softwood lumber dispute. Rural communities rely on industries and natural resources. In fact, one-third of Canadians are employed in industries that are directly or indirectly related to resources. Under the new government rural Canadians are seeing over $4 billion in tariffs returned to Canada.

Budget 2006, which the Liberals and the NDP did not support, included measures for the government to help Canadians through international pressures and disruptions of their livelihood.

We have worked with the United States to loosen trade restrictions on Canadian cattle after the BSE crisis. We have removed the tax liability faced by fishers when they transfer their fishing property. We have committed an additional $2.2 billion over five years to the municipal rural infrastructure fund.

Canada's new government also took action against poverty by reducing taxes and by other budget measures that leave more money in the pockets of Canadians, especially low income Canadians and rural families.

We cut the GST by 1%. We reduced personal income tax, improved credits for low income Canadians and look forward to more tax relief in a few weeks when our budget comes down on March 19.

We are delivering choice in child care through the universal child care benefit which provides families with $100 per month for each child under six so that parents can make the decision on how they want to look after their children.

We have invested in skills and education by providing a tax credit to employers who hire apprentices and through grants to first and second year apprentices. The Liberals opposed each of those, as did the NDP.

The Minister of Agriculture and Agri-Food made changes to the CAIS program and these changes are welcomed by rural Canadians. As a result, over $950 million are being returned to the pockets of producers. We implemented a crop protection program to help farmers affected by the flooding in 2005 and 2006.

The minister introduced a two year pilot project for low income farms and farm families that will help rural families in need with the tools to earn a better living on and off the farm; 1,400 producers and over $130 million has gone out.

Rural Canadian agriculture producers are able to face down poverty as a result of this government. Over $5 billion in government support will find its way to producers before the end of this fiscal year.

The importance of rural Canada to all Canadians is clear. Canadians are pleased to see a government that shares their views on what is important. Canada's new government is working hard to fight against poverty in Canada.

We are taking action for those on our farms, those in our small resource communities, those living on reserves and those in our cities. I am proud to part of a government that is doing so much to fight poverty in rural Canada.

One level of government cannot do it alone. Indeed, governments cannot act alone. We need provinces and local governments. We need those living within our communities to take part in the solutions.

Together we can make a tremendous difference. Together we can work to ensure all citizens, rural, urban, aboriginal and new Canadians, build Canada's prosperity and take part in that prosperity.

[Business of Supply, February 20th, 2007]

Mr. Speaker, I have a question for the hon. member. I respect and appreciate the amount of compassion that she has. In fact, in earlier days when she was an MPP, she was my representative in Middlesex county.

I really wonder, though, in terms of the hard work she did back then as a member of the provincial government, and in leaving the province of Ontario basically broke at the end of her party's tenure, what did the member's party actually do in terms of poverty issues in Ontario at that time?