David Anderson

[September 28th, 2009]

Mr. Speaker, we see the excesses from the other side one more time. What we do is that the previous Liberal government took every measure possible to gut our food safety system.

Unlike the Liberals, our government has increased funding and inspectors to food safety. We originally added 200 new inspectors and put $113 million into the food safety and consumer action plan. We have just announced an additional $75 million for food safety and another 160 food safety staff to address the Weatherill report.

Contrast that to the Liberals. Food safety was cut by the Liberals in 1994, again in 1995. If that was not enough, they did it again in 2005. To justify his cuts, former Liberal Prime Minister Paul Martin said:

Surely we can all agree that it is simply silly for a food-processing plant to have a federal meat inspector, a federal health inspector, a federal fish inspector, not to mention a provincial health inspector and a provincial food inspector tripping over themselves on the same day, in the same plant...

The record is clear. The Liberals gutted our food safety system.

[September 28th, 2009]

Mr. Speaker, it is unfortunate the member opposite has not followed the hearings of the special committee on this very subject. If she had, the member would have a clear understanding of the timelines which were gone over at the committee.

We have seen some of the leadership of the opposition party on the other side failing to even follow what is going on in the House of Commons. I guess I should point out that the House of Commons agriculture committee has declined to support a public inquiry, so we believe the matter has been discussed at length.

I thank the member for the opportunity to speak to all of the positive action that the government has taken since the report of the independent investigator, which came out this summer. These investments that we have made improve our ability to protect Canadians from outbreaks related to food-borne illness. That is something the previous Liberal government failed to do as the Liberals continuously gutted food safety funding during their tenure.

Indeed, to restored trust in our food safety system, our government has studied and is acting upon all of the recommendations made in the reports of the independent investigator and the Standing Committee on Agriculture and Agri-Food, as well as the respective lessons learned by PHAC, Health Canada and the CFIA.

The government has reviewed Canada's food safety systems and emergency response operations in the context of the outbreak and each of the lessons learned reports. The reports are detailed and frank assessments of what worked and what did not and demonstrate our government's commitment to a robust and effective food safety system.

Our Conservative government is responding quickly, professionally, tirelessly and effectively and has worked co-operatively with its partners during the outbreak investigation and the subsequent recall process. However, we recognize there are areas where we can improve, and we are acting on these. We are also moving ahead on all 57 recommendations made by the independent investigator, Sheila Weatherill, who was commended by the Standing Committee on Agriculture and Agri-Food for her excellent indepth investigation.

Seventy-five million dollars is being invested over the next three years to immediately begin implementing these recommendations. Action will focus on prevention, surveillance, a detection and better response, including the hiring of 166 food safety staff, which includes the training of 70 new front line inspectors of ready-to-eat meats. It also includes providing 24/7 availability of health risk assessment teams to support food safety investigations, and implementing a national public health surveillance tool to improve detection, recording and analysis.

Already our Conservative government has made significant changes to Canada's listeria management strategy, including making environmental testing and reporting mandatory at ready-to-eat meat plants and reinstating end-product testing by government inspectors.

Food safety is a number one priority of our Conservative government, and we now have tougher food safety regulations than ever before. That is why it is this government and not the Liberal Party that Canadians can trust.

[June 18th, 2009]

Madam Speaker, we certainly appreciate the words of thanks from the member opposite.

I am sure the industry will provide thoughtful comments to the National Energy Board's proposed damage prevention regulations. There are concerns about this. I have been assured that the NEB wants the development of these regulations to be an open and an interactive process. This is particularly important given the broad nature of stakeholders that will be affected by them, as mentioned by the member opposite.

These proposed regulations would give renewed meaning to the phrase “dial before you dig”, providing a more comprehensive and coordinated approach to preventing damage to pipelines and improving public safety.

[June 18th, 2009]

Madam Speaker, the member will be reassured to know that the Transportation Safety Board has investigated this occurrence for the purpose of advancing pipeline safety under its mandate.

In this instance, the pipeline that ruptured is operated by Kinder Morgan Canada Inc. and is regulated by the NEB under the National Energy Board Act.

The National Energy Board regulates the operations of KMC. When the rupture occurred, Natural Resources Canada became the lead federal response agency. In that role we worked with the other responders and KMC in ensuring the emergency response was effective and coordinated. The NEB had people on site throughout the emergency and during the following remedial cleanup efforts.

The NEB has initiated an investigation into this event to determine if there were any violations of its regulations. The investigation will also include a review of practices, behaviours, regulations, or anything else that could prevent similar occurrences in the future.

The TSB has completed its investigation with the publication of this report. The National Energy Board's investigation is continuing and until it is complete, it is premature to comment on any of its possible or potential findings.

The NEB continues to coordinate discussions between agencies and KMC. A multi-jurisdictional stakeholder group consisting of first nations, along with regional, municipal, provincial and federal agencies, has been established. This group is working co-operatively to determine the remediation end points and to review intermediate reports and analysis.

Cleanup activities occurred during the emergency response and continued through follow-up operations. These efforts included containing the released oil, while attempting to mitigate potential impacts to the public and the environment.

The cleanup of the residential area impacted by the spill was completed in a coordinated manner between both KMC and the affected residents.

The reclamation activities were performed in accordance with the British Columbia ministry of environment's contaminated sites regulations under British Columbia's regulations and guidelines and it followed the certificate of compliance process.

The majority of cleanup operations in the residential area are now complete. KMC will continue to monitor the area and address landowner concerns as they arise. KMC continues to monitor and assess the impacted areas and initiate additional cleanup work as necessary.

Through the course of the NEB's investigation, we will seek to determine and identify if any of the parties involved were in contravention of the act and regulations. Further actions on the part of the NEB will be determined as the investigation evolves.

I know the industry has an outstanding safety record, but there does remain a need for constant vigilance in order to ensure the protection of people, the environment and energy security.

[Medical Isotopes, June 5th, 2009]

Mr. Speaker, he is one to be talking about honesty. He should be trying to deal with the issue instead of fearmongering and trying to scare Canadians.

We know in fact that the Petten reactor in the Netherlands is going to increase production by 50%. South Africa has increased its supply as well. These commitments are similar to the commitment we made to other countries when they were having problems. We are working internationally with people to deal with this situation.

[Medical Isotopes, June 5th, 2009]

Mr. Speaker, rather than trying to score political points on this issue, the member perhaps should have been at the Natural Resources committee yesterday where we heard about these very issues.

In fact, if he had been at question period yesterday, he would also know that the minister said we are working with our partners. In the Netherlands, Petten reactor is going to be upping its production by 50%. The Australians are coming on line with their reactor much quicker than anticipated. The minister is working with the international partners to deal with this situation.

[Mining Industry, May 29th, 2009]

Mr. Speaker, nothing could be further from the truth. This government has committed to communities across this country with our community adjustment fund. We have committed with the clean energy fund as well. We undertook the most extensive prebudget consultations in Canadian history.

In terms of the mining sector we have done a number of things. I met with folks from the mining industry last week and they congratulated us on extending the super flow-through shares for mineral exploration. We are working on exploration. We are working on research and development. We are working on developing the industry and supporting mining through this tough time.

[National Prayer Breakfast, May 28th, 2009]

Madam Speaker, I rise in the House today after a very successful event this morning. It was my distinct privilege and honour to chair, for the third time, the National Prayer Breakfast here in Ottawa.

Over the last 44 years, the National Prayer Breakfast has brought together people from all faiths and political philosophies to celebrate the spirit of Jesus Christ. I was pleased to see many of my colleagues from each party in attendance at this morning's event. People from across our great nation joined members of Parliament and senators, diplomats and ambassadors to pray under the theme of faith in uncertain times.

It is especially important in light of the challenges we face in today's worldwide recession that we recall and lean on the principles of faith. We are experiencing a global financial crisis. In these uncertain times, faith and hope are precious commodities. As parliamentarians, we are called to lead our nation. How can we convince Canadians to have faith and hope in our nation without demonstrating them ourselves?

It is the spirit of Jesus Christ that gives many of us here today faith and hope in these uncertain times.

[Nuclear Liability and Compensation Act, May 15th, 2009]

Mr. Speaker, we can already see the NDP's enthusiasm for one more government initiative.

The reality in the United States is that individual operators are required to carry $370 million in primary insurance and another $135 million in secondary insurance. They also pool their resources. The industry in the United States is much bigger than it is here in Canada.

In order to deal with this issue fairly, as well as with the operators, the Canadian taxpayers and the industry itself, we believe the $650 million is more than adequate to deal with any of the incidents that we may be able to foresee.

[Nuclear Liability and Compensation Act, May 15th, 2009]

Mr. Speaker, it is my understanding that there is one insurance provider within Canada that will be providing that insurance.

I just want to talk a little bit about the comparison with some of the other venues as well before I get into the details of the $650 million. This compares favourably with what is happening in other countries that have nuclear facilities. There are a number of different ways that countries approach this but what we are doing here is in line with what most of the other countries do and it is line with the limits that other countries have on their liability requirements.

I just want to run through a couple of reasons why we have done this. The $650 million liability limit exceeds what we believe is the public's need for adequate compensation in the event of an foreseeable incident. It balances the need for victim compensation with the requirement for the operator to provide insurance. It responds to the recommendations of the Senate committee on energy, the environment and natural resources from a number of years ago that felt that this was an adequate limit.

It reflects insurance capacity, which is also important. If insurance is required to be carried, the industry must find a capacity where the insurance industry is able to carry that. There are some other areas that are moving to limits that are a little higher and some that are at lower limits. For example, the Americans require a little bit less on each of their individual facilities. However, we believe this is appropriate here.

I think it is important that we recognize that the amounts can be raised by regulation. There will be a review regularly and if it is found not be adequate, it can be increased. That has not been done in the present legislation.