House of Commons photoWon his last election, in 2015, with 69% of the vote.
Points of Order March 14th, 2008
Mr. Speaker, it may be a dispute as to the facts but he is also twisting what the minister said yesterday in the House, so I would refer you to that as well. He clearly fails to understand the issues here and has tried to mislead Canadians, western Canadian farmers in particular, and, I would suggest, the House as well.
Points of Order March 14th, 2008
Mr. Speaker, I want to address the strange and almost bizarre accusation or mistake that the member for Toronto—Danforth made yesterday and the member for Malpeque has made again today.
I want to point out that I have never in fact implied, as the member for Toronto—Danforth said, that I was aware of the individual business relationship of one farmer, the head of the National Farmers Union, no less, and the Canadian Wheat Board.
Apparently what he was referring to yesterday were my comments in the House of Commons where I called Mr. Wells an organic farmer. I had asked Mr. Wells, as farmers across western Canada have asked him, to explain if he was taking the special deal that the Canadian Wheat Board offers to organic producers at the same time his organization was taking the position that other farmers should not have those same opportunities.
Mr. Wells, his neighbours, his own organization and the Internet, if you go on it, Sir, all recognize him as an organic farmers. Therefore, if that was the members' accusation, I guess they have demonstrated, once again, the failure of their research abilities, particularly the NDP.
Even with those limitations, it seems to me that both the member for Toronto—Danforth and the member for Malpeque have the responsibility to ensure they are accurate and to tell the truth.
I would appreciate if they would actually have the stomach, the guts, to stand up today to acknowledge their mistakes and apologize for their misleading comments. They have misled western Canadian farmers. They have misled the House as well. Therefore, I would appreciate that apology.
Agriculture March 14th, 2008
Mr. Speaker, it is always good to see the Liberals focus on agriculture at 12:10 p.m. on Friday. That is the only time that they ever ask questions. It is also good to see they are disconnected with agriculture because their questions are always full of misinformation.
I really object to what the member is doing today. He is following the NDP leader from yesterday. The minister answered the question yesterday.
Mr. Wells is well known as an organic farmer. If they are accusing me of saying that he was one, the NFU website says that. My question for Mr. Wells is simply this. Has he been able to take advantage of the organic grower special buy-back this year? If he has, why is he telling other farmers that they cannot have the same deal?
Mr. Speaker, that is just another example of how that member is completely out of touch with western Canada. We already had a plebiscite a year ago and two-thirds of producers indicated that they wanted choice. Today the number is probably 75% to 80% more. The reason they want choice is to maximize the benefits of their industry. They know full well that if they would have had access to the market this year they would have done far better than they have so far under the Canadian Wheat Board.
We know that a significant majority of producers have been looking forward to making their own marketing decisions as of the past August 1. They were disappointed with the Federal Court decision that maintained the single desk of the Canadian Wheat Board. Producers were also disappointed that the Federal Court of Appeal refused to overturn that decision.
Today this government once again showed strong leadership and introduced legislation that would bring marketing freedom to the western barley producers that they deserve. It is time that the opposition did the right thing, put its ideological ideas aside and voted for freedom.
Mr. Speaker, the member opposite wants to talk about democracy but we saw an interesting display of it a bit earlier here when the Liberals refused to come in and even vote on their own amendment to the budget. We brought in the budget over a week ago and I do not think we have had one question from them about the budget in that whole time. They are supposed to be the official opposition. It is interesting to note that the member is now showing some enthusiasm for this issue but certainly had no enthusiasm for being here earlier and dealing with his own amendment to the budget.
The Liberals continue to misunderstand Canadians and they continue to misunderstand particularly western Canadian farmers.
With regard to this specific question, other than the president, the hiring, firing and dismissal of persons working for the Canadian Wheat Board is the sole responsibility of the Canadian Wheat Board and the board of directors. In this situation, the Canadian Wheat Board has stated that the dismissal of Deanna Allen was a decision made by the board of directors, and that is what it was. The member wanted a direct and honest answer and that is a direct and honest answer as to the situation regarding her firing.
Last spring, 62% of barley farmers voted for marketing freedom and that percentage is certainly a lot higher now than it was then. The member is insistent that he will try to stop western Canadian farmers from getting marketing choice. As the minister said in here a couple of weeks ago, the hobby horse that the member for Malpeque is riding is heading for the glue factory because the western Canadian agriculture industry wants freedom and this government has an obligation to bring that freedom to these farmers. They demand it and they deserve it.
It has been very interesting over the last year to note that the percentage of western Canadian farmers has grown exponentially in support of marketing choice. As the market has become better, farmers want more choice and more ability to access that market.
The government also has a mandate to follow through on its election promise to bring marketing choice to western Canada. The member for Malpeque does not seem to ever consider imposing a marketing board on his own constituents but he certainly wants to continue to impose one on western Canadian farmers.
This government is listening to our farmers and we are listening to industry players because we know a healthy value chain is good for farmers and it is good for the Canadian economy.
The entire value chain has stood united in calling for barley marketing freedom. It is not just farmers, although probably three-quarters or more of them now want marketing choice, but it is also the maltsters and the brewers. Everybody except the Canadian Wheat Board, the member and members of his party opposite want marketing choice.
The minister has brought forward legislation and we will move toward marketing freedom. I would ask the member opposite if he would not join with me in supporting that legislation because it is good legislation for western Canadian farmers. If he knows anything about western Canada, if he is interested in actually gaining support out in western Canada, I would think he would be willing to stand and vote with us. Every one of the groups, from farmer to handler to malster to brewer, has been calling for marketing freedom.
Why does the opposition insist on standing in the way of a healthy and a vibrant industry?
The Budget February 28th, 2008
Mr. Speaker, it is my honour to stand before the House after Canada's Conservative government tabled a balanced, focused and prudent budget earlier this week.
The budget is good news for Saskatchewan. With programs like agri-stability, agri-invest, agri-insurance and agri-recovery, as well as the advance payments program, we are giving our farmers a chance to succeed.
Livestock and pork producers have been under pressure lately and have asked for help. One of their requests was that no government program would damage their trade opportunities. We have stepped forward. Our finance and agriculture ministers have once again put farmers first.
That is why our budget commits an additional $72 million on programs for our producers. We are spending $50 million on a sow cull program that will help bring stability to the marketplace. We have committed additional resources to ensure better access to the advance payment plan.
Rural Saskatchewan will certainly benefit from the $240 million for carbon capture and storage, the clean energy project.
The budget builds a stronger Saskatchewan.
Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission February 15th, 2008
Mr. Speaker, one thing was clear. A health risk existed for Canadians. The Liberal deputy leader himself called this a national medical crisis. Parliament made the decision to act, and it was the right decision.
Now opposition members want to rewrite history. Through this whole time period, they have tried to take different positions each week. We have acted. Parliament acted in the right way. We protected the health of Canadians, and Canadians have thanked us for that.
Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission February 15th, 2008
Mr. Speaker, one of the great things about our country is we have access to a fair court system. Ms. Keen has taken the opportunity to access that. Because it is before the courts, we have no comment on this issue.
Canada Grain Act February 15th, 2008
Mr. Speaker, it is great to be able to get up on this issue one more time. I want to address some of the accusations the member made against me, but first I think I need to suggest to him, and I know many of my colleagues would suggest this to him as well, that he needs to go to more than just the NDP's farm wing, the NFU, for his advice. He needs to get a broader perspective of the agricultural industry, particularly in western Canada.
With regard to his comments about what I said the other night, I found it very strange. I have always been a strong advocate of organic farming in western Canada. I think it presents some great opportunities. That is why I was extremely puzzled when Mr. Stewart Wells claimed that I had defamed him the other night when I called him an organic farmer.
It seemed to be an extremely strange response from him and the National Farmers Union, unless we know that this year the Canadian Wheat Board has given virtually a zero buyback to organic farmers. They can buy their grain back and they can market it however they want.
I am told by his neighbours that Mr. Wells is an organic farmer. He refuses to actually answer the question as to whether he is or is not. If he is, he is able to take advantage of that opportunity, while 98% of farmers in western Canada cannot access that same buyback. They cannot access the ability to market their own grain.
My questions to Mr. Wells have been as follows. Is he an organic farmer? If he is an organic farmer, has he been able to take advantage of the buyback? If so, why has he not stood up and suggested that it would be good for the rest of western Canadian farmers to have the same opportunities that he has? Those are simply the questions that I was raising the other night.
The NFU's extremely aggressive and angry response to me tells me that maybe he needs to answer those questions and that he is trying to avoid answering the questions as to whether he is an organic farmer and has been able to take advantage of that tremendous opportunity offered by the buyback, which the rest of us would love to have.
If Mr. Wells is not an organic farmer, I would be glad to apologize to him for that. I also understand that if he is not one he is probably wishing he was so that he could take advantage of the tremendous opportunities that organic farmers have, because they can market their own grain this year.
I would like the member from the NDP to explain to the House today why the NDP would be taking a position that would allow some farmers in western Canada to buy back their grain for eight cents and then market it themselves, which we think is a tremendous thing, but then tell other farmers that they cannot even get a buyback, that they can take a price from the Canadian Wheat Board that is less than half of what organic farmers are getting.
Livestock Industry February 13th, 2008
The main thing, Mr. Speaker, as far as the government is concerned, is that we have a world class agricultural industry in this country and that the regulatory system is a good system and convenient for agricultural producers to use.
I do not have a lot of time to talk about this, but we have been moving in the direction of trying to make sure that the regulatory system works for our producers. We have tried to simplify it from the complicated mess that was left for us in--