Bradley Trost

[Community Service, January 26th, 2015]

Mr. Speaker, today, we honour Ron Ardell of Saskatoon, who exemplifies the faith of the common man that inspires us all.

Ron and his wife of 40 years, MaryAnn, met at Moose Lake bible camp, where he was a camp counsellor and she was the camp nurse. They raised a family of three boys and supported many local community and sports events, flipping thousands of burger with fried onions for good causes.

Ron's tireless support of grassroots democracy focused on pro-life and pro-family issues, as evidenced by his missing working in only two federal and provincial election campaigns in his entire adult life. A lifelong supporter of the local church, Ron views it as a calling to reach out to community and fellow neighbours in friendship and love.

In 2012, he received his Master of Theology degree, reflecting his lifelong love of God's word.

In 2013, he received a Queen Elizabeth II Diamond Jubilee Medal for lifelong volunteer efforts. In all that he has done, Ron has made putting Jesus Christ first and foremost in his life, running life's race alongside his wife and family.

I will miss my friend. I thank him for being there.

[Pipeline Safety Act, January 26th, 2015]

Mr. Speaker, like many members who arrive late on Monday mornings as a result of flights, I unfortunately have not been able to listen to all of the remarks of my hon. colleagues, so I hope I do not engage in too much duplication in my remarks.

By way of quick summary, as someone who has been on the natural resources committee, I would point out that I quite enjoy doing legislation like this. The pipeline safety act and the other safety acts we have done clearly demonstrate how we as a government and as responsible legislators try to bring together natural resources and the environment to provide for safety and to deliver results for all Canadians. This is something that we sometimes take for granted here in this country, because we have a modern society, a technologically advanced society, a clean society and clean industry that in many parts of the country is based on natural resources.

Other parts of the world do not necessarily have this. They produce natural resources and products for world markets, but they do not always have the safety, the technology, or the culture and mentality to deliver and produce natural resources in a safe way. That is why I enjoy talking about issues such as the pipeline safety act. Canada does have extraordinary expertise with respect to pipelines and an extraordinary safety record. The environment and oil production can go hand in hand.

I will make some comments on what I think a few other people will already have said in this debate, but which need repeating.

Building and operating safe pipelines is something that Canadians have done well for decades. Federally regulated pipelines in Canada have transported 99.999% of oil safely. Our environmental performance has been strong. It is world class. As technology and regulations are improved, safety standards are raised.

The government has structured its plan based upon four key objectives. First of all, we make regulatory review processes for major projects and pipelines fit in a more timely and predictable way. Another goal of all of our legislation involving natural resources and issues like pipelines is to reduce duplication. We also try to strengthen protections for the environment in everything that we do. Our government is also strongly committed to engaging first nations in every aspect of resource development.

Across Canada the opportunities for prosperity in aboriginal communities from infrastructure and resource development have never been greater. It is one of the reasons the government is determined to forging a strong and lasting relationship with aboriginal peoples in Canada in the development of oil and gas resources. There are not many economic opportunities for many aboriginal communities located in rural areas, except for natural resources.

Over the past year, as part of its responsible resource development plan, the government has initiated a series of new measures to ensure the safe development of natural resources. We introduced new enforcement mechanisms and monetary penalties for non-compliance, along with new legislation, regulations, standards, and environmental requirements. Oil and gas pipeline inspections have increased by 50% a year and comprehensive audits of pipelines have doubled.

The government has also brought in tough new measures for oil tankers to ensure the safe transportation of our energy resources through our waterways. With respect to the Safeguarding Canada's Seas and Skies Act, an expert panel reviewed Canada's current tanker safety. As Canadians can see, we are committed to safety from the second oil is pumped from the ground right up until the time it is delivered and leaves not only our lands but our waters as well. Building on these measures the government is taking steps to improve the pipeline safety record and ensure that it remains truly world class.

The new legislation focuses on prevention, preparedness, response liability, and compensation. It takes concrete action to strengthen pipeline safety and would modernize the National Energy Board Act.

I am just going to summarize my remarks by saying that in everything we do, we should have in mind a motto that goes something like this:

Good, better, best,
Let's never rest.
Our good is better;
Our better is best.

That rule should apply to everything in this place, and especially to environmentally sensitive legislation. Legislation like this would help to protect Canada's environment while our natural resources are developed.

[National Defence, December 11th, 2014]

Mr. Speaker, the government continues to provide regular updates to Canadians in this House on Operation Impact and the ongoing efforts of our forces to confront and degrade the military capabilities of the terrorist group ISIL.

Unlike the previous Liberal government who sent armed forces to Afghanistan without a debate or vote in Parliament, this government put forward a motion, which clearly defines the motives, parameters, and goals of Canada's contribution to fight ISIL.

As we come to the end of this parliamentary sitting, could the Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of National Defence please, once again, update the House on Operation Impact?

[Saskatoon Pregnancy Options Centre, November 26th, 2014]

Mr. Speaker, founded 18 years ago, Saskatoon Pregnancy Options Centre is a community outreach that provides free pregnancy tests, counselling, material assistance and references for prenatal medical care and legal services.

Led by director Marilyn Jackson, Saskatoon Pregnancy Options Centre assists Saskatoon area women and families dealing with unplanned pregnancies. It provides emotional and physical support to women who are going through an uncertain time of life.

It is for many women a safe, caring place to talk and share. Hands-on support is not neglected. Maternity clothes, baby clothes and formula are provided to new and soon to be new moms who need a loving hand. Parenting classes and educational assistance are a growing part of its outreach to the community.

Supported by donations and led by a volunteer board, it has made a real contribution to many lives in Saskatoon. I am sure many members of the House will want to join me in congratulating the centre on its fine work. Life, what a beautiful choice.

[Employment, November 5th, 2014]

Mr. Speaker, yesterday Skills Canada launched National Skilled Trades and Technology Week.

Now in its tenth year, this event creates awareness for young Canadians about good career opportunities in skilled trades and technologies across Canada.

With a growing demand for workers in the skilled trades, would the Minister of Employment and Social Development update this House on what the government is doing to help young Canadians who want to pursue these careers?

[World War II Veteran, November 5th, 2014]

Mr. Speaker, Mathew Bunko was born March 9, 1918, on the family farm near Humboldt, Saskatchewan. He purchased his own land in the fall of 1941. Then, on November 4 of that year, he was called to serve his country.

After basic training in Winnipeg and Nanaimo as a private with the Rocky Mountain Rangers, he left for action to recapture Kiska Island, in the north Pacific, on August 15, 1943. After six months, he was sent overseas with the South Saskatchewan Regiment to England, Holland, and Germany, until his discharge on January 24, 1946.

He returned home to farm, and on October 10, 1948, he married Myrna Kaminski. Together they raised five children on their farm.

Mathew and Myrna Bunko both reside at St. Mary's Villa, the long-term care facility in Humboldt. They recently celebrated their 66th anniversary.

The Parliament and people of Canada thank Mr. Bunko for his service. We thank him for what he was willing to give, where he was willing to go, and what he was willing to do.

[Canada-Korea Economic Growth and Prosperity Act, October 28th, 2014]

Mr. Speaker, when the hon. member was going through her three criteria that New Democrats have for whether or not they support trade deals, one of the criteria was whether the partner would be a significant strategic partner for Canada. Judging from the way the hon. member describes what a strategic and significant partner would be, Canada would not engage with any low-income nations or smaller nations around the world.

Free trade helps countries. We engage in trade to boost our relationships with them and to boost other countries' standards of living. Why is the hon. member opposed to a significant Canadian foreign policy tool that can help countries in places like Africa or Latin America, countries that are not large, wealthy, or strategic in the sense that New Democrats are using those terms?

[Canada-Korea Economic Growth and Prosperity Act, October 28th, 2014]

Mr. Speaker, as I pointed out, the hon. member needs to understand that if we run a deficit in one place, we will end up running a surplus in the other.

I run a deficit with every car dealership I have ever bought a car from. I run a surplus with the federal government, because I am employed by the federal government. That is where the balance ultimately comes out.

We have winners and we have losers. That is true, but in the end, everyone is a winner with free trade, in an economic sense. As I qualified before, we do not always do things for the best of the economy, as there are other priorities.

In an economic sense, everyone wins, because it is ultimately about the specialization of labour. It is about the most efficient way we can exchange goods and services and produce them for the benefit of all.

[Canada-Korea Economic Growth and Prosperity Act, October 28th, 2014]

Mr. Speaker, the hon. member makes an interesting point. While most people instinctively understand that running fiscal deficits is a bad thing over the long term, notwithstanding the often Keynesian approaches all parties take, ours less than any of the others, deficits, when it comes to trade policy, are not necessarily a bad thing. We have to understand that the numbers that are often given are not totally encompassing. Canada has long run a trade surplus with the United States, but it does not include things like Canadian tourist trips to Florida, so these numbers are often incomplete.

The only way we can run trade surpluses with one part of the world is if we end up with trade deficits with the others. Of course, there are ways around it if we borrow, do not pay our bills, and so on. However, let us assume that all bills are paid. If we run trade deficits in some parts of the world, we bring in cheaper or more goods. These goods can then be used to manufacture, produce things, and ultimately, provide goods. Again, this is assuming that everyone pays and that there is no borrowing or theft.

Just as with human beings, countries have to pay their bills. One man's surplus is another man's deficit. In the end, the books should balance themselves.

[Canada-Korea Economic Growth and Prosperity Act, October 28th, 2014]

Mr. Speaker, as I noted in my speech, I no longer sit on the trade committee. I did before, prior to the last election.

One of the things we often talk about when it comes to trade deals, which the hon. member talked about, is protection. Protections for industry in trade deals are often damaging to the consumer. What we protect with one hand, we take away from other Canadians with the other. I am not sure if that is what the amendments the hon. member is referring to would have done, but it is something we should be cautious about.

We often talk about protecting industries, but what we often mean is that we are putting hidden taxes on consumers.