Helena Guergis

[Points of Order, June 10th, 2005]

Mr. Speaker, during question period the Minister of International Cooperation contradicted her department's declaration regarding government to government aid to China. To assist the House in clarifying this matter, I therefore seek unanimous consent to table a document published by CIDA, entitled “Statistical Report on Official Development Assistance Fiscal Year 2003-2004”.

[China, June 10th, 2005]

Mr. Speaker, the minister should check her website for the description of the program she is talking about.

In March of this year, CIDA released a document entitled “Statistical Report on Official Development Assistance Fiscal Year 2003-2004”. On page 41 under the heading “Government to Government”, it states that China received over $33 million in total net disbursements from Canada.

Let me repeat that. CIDA says that it gives money directly to the Chinese government. Who is telling the truth and who is incompetent, the minister or her staff at CIDA?

[China, June 10th, 2005]

Mr. Speaker, yesterday the minister said that she would speak very slowly for me. Today I am going to speak slowly for her because after 18 months on the job she still does not get it.

Her Liberal government is using taxpayer money to fund the Chinese government. The minister claims that this money is to set up a legal aid system, this in a country where people are tortured and disappear off the street. What good is legal aid when one cannot get a fair trial?

When will the minister stop giving money to communist China?

[China, June 9th, 2005]

Mr. Speaker, Canadians want to know when the government will start standing up for human rights. It has been 16 years since the Tiananmen Square massacre and human rights in China have yet to improve. China has the world's largest army, the world's second largest economy, nuclear weapons, and 700 missiles pointed at Taiwan.

When will the minister stop giving money to the undemocratic and repressive communist Chinese government?

[China, June 9th, 2005]

Mr. Speaker, according to its own documents the government gave at least $33 million to the government of China last year. Sadly, this came as a surprise to the minister when she was shown the information. What is more shocking for Canadians are reports that a Chinese spy network has been operating in Canada. This news comes several months after CSIS warned of this activity, yet the federal government has done nothing about it.

Has the government discussed the issue with Chinese officials?

[Supply Management, June 7th, 2005]

Madam Chair, I must admit I had great difficulty hearing the member's question with all the yelling going on back and forth in here.

I believe the question was about whether we would increase slaughter capacity. That is very important to the Conservative Party. We have been saying for quite some time now that we would like to see the Liberals increase slaughter capacity. They have been making promises to increase this capacity, but we are still waiting for it. Why?

The only time we seem to see any action or see the delays stop with respect to slaughter capacity is when the Conservative Party raises it in the House and then the Liberals step up to the table. That is the only time we seem to see slaughter capacity increased. It is extremely important, especially for cull cows, and we do support it.

[Supply Management, June 7th, 2005]

Madam Chair, honestly, I will not agree with the majority of what the minister said.

I would like to point out that during the last election I campaigned supporting supply management, enforcing that our party's platform was to support supply management. Nothing has changed since that date.

The minister has raised the issue about not having the government at the table, which is something I spoke to in my remarks earlier. I would like to elaborate a little bit more on the WTO negotiations and point out some facts so those listening at home have a full understanding as to what I am speaking about here.

I would like to remind the minister again that political pressure is what caused the Liberal government to verbalize its support for supply management.

However, this verbal support has been just that. When the rubber hits the road at the WTO negotiations, the Liberal government has failed to adequately represent all agricultural producers, including those in the supply managed sectors.

One of the members earlier, I believe it was the member for Provencher, pointed out that Canadian farmers had suffered from poor ministerial representation at WTO negotiations. A recent example of the Liberals shirking their duties to Canadian farmers was the absence of the Minister of International Trade and the Minister of Agriculture and Agri-food at the ministerial meeting in Kenya on March 2 to 4.

At this meeting member countries discussed their commitments to the Doha round. The international trade minister and the agriculture and agri-food minister were not at the meeting because they were attending the Liberal convention. Under the rules of the mini-ministerial without a minister present, no other representatives of that country are allowed to speak officially. It is a shame that they did not have anyone there representing Canada.

The Liberals have clearly done a very poor job of showing other countries that Canada's supply managed sectors ought to be exempt from WTO negotiations. Instead they have used tariffs in the supply managed sectors as bargaining chips in the WTO negotiations.

The poor showing by these ministers at the WTO imperils the livelihood of all farmers. Canada is the third largest agriculture exporter in the world. Given that the two ministers have given mixed messages to the WTO and member countries, it is not surprising that Canada is losing credibility among the WTO countries.

[Supply Management, June 7th, 2005]

Madam Chair, it is a pleasure to speak this evening on this very important matter of supply management.

Those members who have had the opportunity to visit my beautiful riding of Simcoe--Grey know that a major source of employment is the agricultural industry. Agriculture is the key economic sector of our country and farming provides benefits to the communities that surround it. Rural Canada contributes 15% of Canada's GDP, which benefits all Canadians.

Within my riding of Simcoe--Grey, agricultural and agrifood businesses generate over $150 million. Twenty-seven per cent of goods-producing jobs are actually agrifood jobs. The result is safe, secure and affordable food that is produced close to home.

However, it is important that producers and governments work together to make agriculture sustainable. Our farmers are hard-working and independent, but cooperation is becoming increasingly important to make our producers competitive in global markets.

A Conservative government will support supply management and its goal to deliver a high quality product to consumers for a fair price with a reasonable return to the producer. This is common sense. However, it was only because of political pressures that the Liberal government even considered supporting supply management. This is not enough.

Canadian farmers are suffering because of poor ministerial representation by the government at World Trade Organization negotiations. In 2003, for example, the Liberals attempted to restart WTO negotiations by offering to reduce tariff levels on egg, poultry and dairy imports by 5%. In effect, what they are doing is playing the interests of different Canadian farmers against each other to achieve their objectives. This is wrong.

Then, in the 2004 WTO negotiations, this government signed an agreement that threatened supply management in the egg, dairy and poultry sectors. The 2004 agreement commits Canada to reducing tariffs in proportion to reductions made by other countries. This is shameful.

This government has failed to achieve real protection for Canada's supply management sectors. Instead, the Minister of Agriculture and the Minister of International Trade have bargained away tariffs in these sectors piece by piece. Because the government does not stand up for Canadian farmers, it has not been honest with them about the ramifications of these negotiations.

The Conservative Party believes that government must support farmer-led supply management systems and the government must negotiate beneficial trade agreements.

When Canadian agriculture faces unfair trade challenges, Ottawa must go to bat for producers on the world stage with high level delegations. We need a commitment from the government that this supply managed sector will have input into the creation of a trade negotiation mandate, but we have been waiting 12 years for this. It has been 12 years and all we have seen from the government is mismanagement and neglect.

Let us not think for a minute that Canadians farmers are not aware of the lack of support from the government. During the past year I have travelled extensively throughout my riding. I have spoken to hundreds of farmers at community events, on the farm, on the sidewalk, at their doorsteps and at Terry Dowdell's coffee shop at Baxter corners.

Their message to me was clear: they no longer respect politicians. They say their trust has been continuously violated over the past 12 years and they have had enough. They have heard Liberal promises, put their faith in the government over and over again and waited for action, only to see the Liberals continue to break promises, ignore Canadians and further demean elected office in the eyes of the Canadian taxpayer. Promises made, promises broken.

Government, minority or otherwise, brings not only the privilege of the fancy seats on the other side of this chamber but also the responsibility of governing on behalf of Canadians. However, this government has become so arrogant that it no longer represents the needs of Canadians.

It is not just the farmers who are fed up with this Liberal government. The conflicting Liberal messages are a factor contributing to Canada's isolation at WTO negotiations. Major countries such as the U.S.A., the European Union, Australia, Brazil and India are playing an increasingly important role in WTO negotiations, whereas Canada is being sidelined.

Much like Canada, the European Union and the U.S.A. are net agricultural exporters. They went to the table last July with strong, developed plans to achieve their goals and domestic interests. Canada has no plan. Canada has not defended its agricultural producers and has become a spectator rather than a participant in influencing the agriculture agreement.

The Liberals will tell us that they sought consensus of the industry through stakeholder consultations, convincing producers that they had sufficient input to proceed with trade negotiations. However, the Liberals have violated their trust. The government has abdicated its responsibility to live up to its own negotiating mandate.

Canadian farmers want and need a government that will listen to them, a government that will work to support and protect the agriculture industry, a government for Canadians.

Keith Currie, president of the Simcoe County Federation of Agriculture and also a local farmer in my riding, was very clear with respect to supply management. He said that supply management works and it would be a shame if the government were to let it fall between the cracks.

He said that supply management provides a good return on investment for farmers and allows them to contribute their profits back into the economy, not only for new equipment but to purchase items such as furniture for their homes and schooling for their children. Furthermore, farmers pay taxes on their profits. It is therefore a win-win for all parties involved, he said. I could not agree more.

Mr. Currie went on to say that the federal government needs a long term plan for agriculture and that Canadians must know that a country with a stable food supply will remain economically stable. We cannot lose that.

Mr. Bill Mitchell, assistant director of communications and planning for the Dairy Farmers of Ontario, made it very clear that the dairy industry wants the Canadian government to take a strong stance in the upcoming trade negotiations. He also indicated that the dairy industry has had substantial losses due to subsidized imports that are coming in through trade loopholes and dairy farmers want the government to act now and stop the damage.

I will explain the loophole in plain language with the following example. If we take butter oil and sugar and mix them together, they are then tariff free. This is because the two items together create a new mixture not picked up in trade negotiations. Since the new mixture was not part of the trade negotiations, it is tariff free.

Mr. Mitchell said that Canada should be protecting its agriculture industries by stopping loopholes that create losses for our farmers. He said that one way to do this is to improve product standards and labelling regulations.

Canadian farmers involved in the supply managed industries are very committed, hard-working individuals who watch intently what we do here on Parliament Hill. They watch because they want the government to finally step up to the plate and put Canada first with respect to WTO negotiations.

I am proud that I can stand in front of them and in this House and say that I support supply management, my party supports supply management and my leader supports supply management. I am proud to stand up for Canadian farmers. Our party is proud to stand up for Canadian farmers.

Just this past summer, the leader of our strong and united Conservative Party, the leader of the official opposition, the member for Calgary Southwest, expressed his strong support for supply management by signing a declaration.

Our party is on record as supporting supply management and also supports the three pillars of supply management as expressed in the declaration:

--the Canadian supply management system...is based on planning production to match demand, on producer pricing that reflects production costs, as well as on control of imports...

The Conservative Party will ensure that Canada's agricultural producers are first on the list when it comes to trade negotiations. The Conservative Party of Canada will stand up for Canadian farmers.

[Banting Memorial High School, June 3rd, 2005]

Mr. Speaker, yesterday, in Alliston, Ontario, over 1,000 students from Banting Memorial High School marched for diabetes. Their march began at the high school and finished at the Sir Frederick Banting homestead.

Last year, the high school students raised in excess of $16,000. This year their principal, John Fallis, challenged them to raise $20,000. Well, the Banting Memorial High School students won their challenge and raised an incredible $31,168.

The proceeds from the walk will go to both Camp Huronda, a diabetes camp for kids, and toward finding a cure for diabetes.

I must say that I am very proud of our local youth. Their commitment and dedication to such a worthy cause sets a precedent for others to follow.

In addition to the funds raised by the students, the former principal of Banting Memorial High School, Gordon Wright, contributed $5,000, and Kit Andrews, a local businessman, donated $500. This brought the total amount raised to over $36,000.

This is just another example of the large impact that small communities have in our country.

[Member for Newton--North Delta, June 2nd, 2005]

Mr. Speaker, however evasive their choice of words may be, once again the Liberals have been caught acting solely in their own best interests. The conflict of interest and post-employment code for public office holders imposes upon cabinet ministers and their ministerial staff an obligation. Let me quote it:

--to uphold the highest ethical standards so that public confidence and trust in the integrity, objectivity and impartiality of government are conserved and enhanced.

Canadians want to know. When is the government going to live up to this code?