House of Commons photo

Track James

Your Say

Elsewhere

Crucial Fact

  • His favourite word is national.

Conservative MP for Selkirk—Interlake—Eastman (Manitoba)

Won his last election, in 2025, with 60% of the vote.

Statements in the House

Canada-European Union Comprehensive Economic and Trade Agreement Implementation Act November 23rd, 2016

Madam Speaker, it is a pleasure to speak today on Bill C-30, the legislation that will bring about the activation of the comprehensive economic and trade agreement between Canada and the European Union.

First and foremost, I want to thank the former minister of agriculture, the member for Battlefords—Lloydminster, and the former minister of trade, the member for Abbotsford, for their great hard work in making sure that this deal came to fruition.

I will give kudos to the government for not screwing it up at the end and for getting the CETA deal finally before us. However, I can tell members that every clause we are looking at, the way the bill is structured, and the way CETA has been negotiated and signed is because of the hard work of the previous Conservative government.

I will just say that it is indeed a momentous occasion. We are agreeing to this great agreement that will bring 28 other countries into free trade with Canada and give Canadian agricultural producers, manufacturers, and service companies access to 500 million consumers in the European Union in those 28 member states.

I can tell members that in my riding of Selkirk—Interlake—Eastman, this is very important. We have a huge agriculture base, with grains, oilseeds, pulse crops, cattle, and hogs, which will all benefit from the preferential access we are going to garner in having free markets in Europe. We are talking about 94% of EU tariff lines against agricultural products being eliminated.

However, there are still some challenges, for our beef products in particular. As a rancher myself and a former member of the Manitoba Cattle Producers Association, we have dealt extensively with all the phytosanitary and non-phytosanitary standards and actions the European Union has taken against Canadian beef over the past 30 years.

This agreement gives us a resolution mechanism for removing those artificial trade barriers, ensuring that we get back to science-based decisions rather than political decisions, which we all too often see in certain countries that like to put up barriers to trade while they try to protect certain segments of their industry. Over the next seven years, Canadian agricultural food, products, grains, and oilseeds that meet those standards will be able to access that marketplace, which is very important.

It is also important in my riding of Selkirk—Interlake—Eastman, because we produce steel. We have Gerdau in Selkirk, which is a very strong company. It produces steel that it sells around the world, especially its elevator rail steel. This, again, is now going to go to a zero-line tariff over the next seven years as this agreement comes into force. Some commodities are going to see line items move even more quickly than that.

Of course, in Selkirk—Interlake—Eastman we produce the best whisky in the world at the Crown Royal Diageo plant. The world champion whisky right now is Northern Harvest whiskey. It beat out all the other whiskies from Scotland, Ireland, the United States, and other places.

National Defence November 23rd, 2016

Mr. Speaker, they are buying a bunch of flying white elephants.

The Prime Minister is risking Canadian jobs, taxpayers' money, and the well-being of our pilots.

The former head of procurement for National Defence, Alan Williams, said that we do not tell a company we intend on buying its product, and then try to negotiate a price. That is like me walking into a car dealership, telling the salesman that I will buy a car in the showroom, and then try to sit down to negotiate a price.

Everybody knows that is ridiculous. The Liberals have bungled this file completely.

Will the Prime Minister reverse this irresponsible decision and immediately launch a fair competition?

National Defence November 23rd, 2016

Mr. Speaker, the Liberals' decision to sole-source the Super Hornet is very dangerous, and is another broken promise. It is dangerous for taxpayers since there was no price announced yesterday. It is dangerous for Canadian jobs since all F-18s are made in Missouri, and it is dangerous to our air force which will now be flying obsolete fighter jets.

Do the Liberals even have a clue how much a Super Hornet is going to cost Canadian taxpayers, and how many jobs are going to be lost in Canada's aerospace industry?

National Defence November 22nd, 2016

Mr. Speaker, the Liberals are propagating the greatest hoax in Canadian defence procurement history. There is no capability gap. Defence Research and Development Canada said that we only needed 65 jets to meet our NORAD and NATO commitments. The commander of the air force said that our CF-18s could fly until 2025. Yesterday, officials from the Department of National Defence confirmed that all 77 CF-18s could be flown right until 2025.

Will the defence minister listen to his officials or will he keep doubling down on the Liberal credibility gap?

National Defence November 22nd, 2016

Mr. Speaker, the Liberals are pursuing their plan to sole source the CF-18 Super Hornet. They told Canadians during the campaign that they could buy the CF-18 for $65 million per plane, but Kuwait just bought 40 of them last week for $335 million apiece. This is a waste of billions of dollars of taxpayer money and is sticking our air force with the wrong plane.

Why is the Minister of National Defence taking five years to hold a competition and punting it down the road until after the next election?

Questions Passed as Orders for Returns November 21st, 2016

With regard to the Future Fighter Capability project: (a) what are the statements of requirements for the (i) Air-to-Air (A/A)capabilities, (ii) Air-to-Ground (A/G)capabilities , (iii) Air-to-Surface (ASu) capabilities, (iv) non-traditional Intelligence, (v) Surveillance and Reconnaissance (ISR), (vi) interoperability with other nations; (b) how many employees work on this project from (i) the Department of National Defence, (ii) Public Services and Procurement Canada, (iii) Innovation, Science and Economic Development Canada, (iv) all other departments and agencies of the government, (v) private organizations outside of the government; (c) how many employees have signed non-disclosure agreements, broken down by employees of (i) the Department of National Defence, (ii) Public Services and Procurement Canada, (iii) Innovation, Science and Economic Development Canada (iv) all other departments and agencies of the government, (v)private organizations outside of the government; and (d) what is the length of each non-disclosure agreement signed by employees of the Future Fighter Capability project?

National Defence November 21st, 2016

Mr. Speaker, we need to do a reality check here.

While the Prime Minister and the defence minister claim that there is a CF-18 capability gap, the fact is that the Liberals have a credibility gap on this issue. Just last week when asked about the supposed capability gap in committee, the chief of the defence staff said, “That is a false deduction.”

The Prime Minister's Office has manipulated the Liberal cabinet to force a sole-source contract. The only solution to fix this mess by the Prime Minister is to do the right thing. Will the Liberals hold a fair and open competition to get the best fighter jets for the brave men and women in uniform?

National Defence November 21st, 2016

Mr. Speaker, the Liberal government will be foolishly putting billions of taxpayer money at risk when it announces very soon it will be sole-sourcing Super Hornet fighter jets.

Respected Professor Elinor Sloan stated:

The...government’s plan to sole-source...Super Hornet fighter jets is wrong. The Super Hornet may—or may not—be the right aircraft for Canada, but we won’t know [that] until there is a full competition for the contract.

Why will the Liberals not hold an open, fair, and transparent competition that ensures that we get the best value for the Canadian taxpayer, the best jobs for Canadians, and the best aircraft for the Royal Canadian Air Force?

National Defence November 17th, 2016

Mr. Speaker, the Liberals promised to end Canada's combat mission in Iraq. Now the Liberal Minister of Transport once defined a combat mission as the following:

It says that a “combat operation” is:

A military operation where the use or threatened use of force, including lethal force, is essential to impose will on an armed opponent or to accomplish a mission. The actual level of force used will be in accordance with specified rules of engagement.

That definition sounds like a perfect description of what our troops are engaged in today, and possibly could even be engaged in tomorrow in Mali.

Will the Prime Minister start telling the truth that he broke his promise and admit that Canadian troops are in direct combat with ISIS?

National Defence November 17th, 2016

Mr. Speaker, since the Liberals will not do it, we thank our troops for neutralizing ISIS terrorists in combat.

In February, the Prime Minister told this House that we do not have any troops on the ground at the front lines, but yesterday we learned Canadians are exchanging fire with ISIS on a daily basis.

Why are the Liberals trying to hide the fact that our troops are on the front lines and are using lethal force to eliminate ISIS terrorists?