John Barlow

[Health of Animals Act, May 1st, 2023]

Mr. Speaker, my colleague's comments show that the system does work in many cases for those authorized persons on farm. They are making those reports. That does show they are bringing forward issues when they see that the protocol, standards or procedures on farm are not being followed. This legislation would not stop that. They are legally obligated to come forward, as a farmer or an employee on a farm, to an authorized person if they see something on farm that is not following the protocol.

To my colleague's point, his argument shows that it is actually working. What I am focusing on are those who are there with no permission to come on that farm. Again, when it comes to committee, I am more than willing to work with my colleague to ensure we can get this legislation passed.

[Health of Animals Act, May 1st, 2023]

Mr. Speaker, as one can see, I have a very supportive group on the agriculture committee that I enjoy working with. The member is exactly right. We not only have to ensure that farm families are environmentally and socially sustainable, but it is also critical that they are economically sustainable. Legislation such as this would ensure that their herds and animals are protected.

It also raises important awareness among Canadians that maybe what they are seeing on social media is not exactly accurate. Farmers invest tens of thousands of dollars, and in some cases hundreds of thousands of dollars, to ensure that the biosecurity protocols in place, which are put forward by the Canadian Food Inspection Agency and provincial bodies, are followed to the letter.

Absolutely, it is critically important. Any opportunity we have to allow farmers to be economically viable for the next generation is a critical tool that we must give those farm families.

[Health of Animals Act, May 1st, 2023]

Mr. Speaker, there is no doubt, especially on the Tschetter farm, for example, that it is doing everything right. It is a free-range turkey farm, yet the protesters still chose its farm, because it is off a main highway, to do their protesting. We know that farmers deal with a number of variables that are out of their control, commodity prices, weather, all of these things, and then add on the potential of protesters coming onto their farms.

Imagine waking up one morning, going into the living room and looking outside, and there are protesters trying to take the family dog because they do not feel it is being treated properly. How would we react? This is exactly what is going on. The protesters are walking into a farmer's backyard and causing extreme mental stress for the family.

[Health of Animals Act, May 1st, 2023]

moved that Bill C-275, An Act to amend the Health of Animals Act (biosecurity on farms), be read the second time and referred to a committee.

Mr. Speaker, it is an honour to rise to speak to my private member's bill.

I have always been taught that if at first we do not succeed, try and try again. I was honoured to have the support of every party in the House in the previous Parliament for my private member's bill, but, unfortunately, an election was called and it died on the Order Paper. Therefore, I am pleased to bring this forward once again on behalf of some of my constituents and farm families across Canada.

I will start my presentation speaking about a family in my riding.

In 2019, I received a call from a farm family in the southern part of my riding that owned a free-range turkey farm. The family members were distraught about what they were supposed to do with a number of protesters who had trespassed on their farm near Fort Macleod. They really had no understanding of what was taking place or what they did to deserve this.

I would ask members how they would feel if they woke up in the morning, went to check their animals, opened the barn and saw 45 protesters trying to take their turkeys off the property. The Tschetter family was really quite distraught. They did not know how to handle this and what to expect. This raised concerns with me about the protection not only of private property, but the biosecurity of those animals and the mental health of that family.

Less than two weeks before, many of these same protesters were on a hog operation in Abbotsford, B.C., where the Binnendyk family had a similar issue. The wife phoned her husband and son to tell them that there were more than 200 protesters in their family's breeding barn. Those protesters, and probably unbeknownst to them, did not understand the very strict biosecurity protocols that farm families had to follow. Those protesters may very well not have realized that they could have been carrying a virus or pest from one farm, the hog farm in Abbotsford, B.C., to a turkey farm in southern Alberta. We have very strict protocols on farms, and they are there for a reason, which is to protect the biosecurity and the health of those animals.

However, not only did the protesters put those animals at risk, but they had a very serious impact on those families. Even when I speak to members of the Tschetter today, they are still upset about what occurred on their farm and are still hesitant when they check their barns.

Calvin Binnendyk, whose hog farm in Abbotsford was impacted, said “I had quite a few sleepless nights, and it was rough on my family, especially my wife, even though she doesn’t even work in the barn. She took it really hard, and she still has a hard time sleeping to this day.” This is three years after that occurrence on their farm.

It is because of these two elements that I bring forward this private member's bill, which would amend the Health of Animals Act.

Bill C-275 proposes to make it an offence to enter, without lawful authority or excuse, a place in which animals are kept if doing so could result in the exposure of animals to disease or toxic substance capable of affecting or contaminating those animals. Simply put, this amendment would apply existing penalties within the act to people who trespass on farm property and facilities where animals are kept.

There is a key element to this as well. This would add a very significant fine to those organizations that encourage this type of behaviour. There is no question that those organizations, which, up to this point, are very unlikely to be held accountable, are fundraising off these actions. They videotape those trespassers and protesters who come onto a farm and they fundraise off that. In case of the farm family in Abbotsford, B.C., many of the pictures and videos that they were showing, according to the court case, never happened on that farm at all. They were staged and, in some cases, allegedly faked.

However, I want to state very clearly for everyone in the House and those listening at home what this legislation would not do.

The bill would not, in any way, disallow protesters from protesting on public property about the issues that they are passionate about and that are important to them. They can hold those rallies and protests outside the farm gate, but there has to be a line in the sand. When they cross that line onto private property and put the health of animals at risk as well as the mental health of our farm families at risk, there has to be a line there. There have to be strict rules in place to deter that action.

The bill would also not stop whistle-blowers from bringing forward cases if they witness practices that jeopardize the safety and welfare of farmers. Canadian farmers and ranchers have the moral and legal obligation to look after their animals. In fact, farmers and their employees are obligated to report any inappropriate actions and any wrongdoing they see happening on a farm, especially because this is a highly regulated atmosphere. They must follow strict codes when it comes to the health, safety and welfare of their farm animals.

I know the members in the House are well aware that there have been numerous actions of protesters on farms. It is becoming more and more daring and reckless.

Only two months ago, an animal rights activist group hung three dead pigs from an overpass in Montreal. I understand this did not happen on a farm, but imagine if one of those pigs had fallen off that overpass and onto the windshield of a passing car? That just symbolizes the extreme lengths that some of these activist groups are willing to go. Again, where did they get those pigs? Were they taken off a farm? They killed them. I do not think that is really protecting the health and welfare of animals.

I know we are going to get some questions about whether we are wading into provincial jurisdiction. Some provinces have implemented something similar. I am proud to say that they were modelled after the legislation I brought forward in the previous Parliament. However, less than half of the provinces and territories have something like this on their books, which shows the federal government and the federal legislators have a leadership role to indicate that there is a line that cannot be crossed.

What this really focuses on is the biosecurity risk and the health of our animals. We saw what COVID did to Canada's economy, a human-borne virus. It devastated not only our economy but economies around the world. Imagine what a similar animal-borne pandemic would do to Canada's agriculture industry. Right now we are experiencing that with avian flu and chicken and egg producers across Canada.

In 2014, in the Fraser Valley, we had 10 farms that had an Al outbreaks and more than 200,000 birds were euthanized.

in 2004, we had a highly pathogenic strain that led to the slaughter of 17 million farm birds. Before that outbreak was eventually brought under control it cost producers $380 million.

We are going through a similar experience right now, where 7.5 million domestic birds across B.C. Alberta, Ontario, Quebec and Saskatchewan have had to be euthanized.

We know that it is only an amount of time before our next concern, and that is African swine fever. This has killed more than half the pigs in China and is spreading to the Asia-Pacific, Central Asia, Eastern Europe and even the Dominican Republic. It is at our doorstep and we have to take precautions to ensure that our producers are protected. If African swine fever were to occur in Canada, it would have a $24 billion economic hit to Canada's pork industry. More than 45,000 people are employed in that industry and 70% of our $4.25-billion industry is exported around the world.

Whether we are prepared to deal with ASF or avian flu is something the agriculture committee will very seriously look into soon, and the threat of transmission is very real. Again, I cannot stress this enough. I know that if any of my colleagues here have toured a chicken farm, or an egg hatchery or a pork operation, they know the protocols that have to be taken, such as putting on a hazmat suit, washing one's boots, putting on booties and a hair-net. If anyone has gone to an animal processing facility, it is very similar. There are very strict protocols and they are there for a reason.

I think that, in many cases, protesters are not willingly putting the biosecurity of those farms at risk but they do not understand the protocols that are in place, which every farm family follows very closely. Those animals are their livelihood and they want to ensure they are treated well. I think all of us in the House understand that. If we can take proactive measures to ensure that these types of animal pandemics do not occur, we want to do that. It is one tool that we are able to use.

We cannot make the same mistake with a potential outbreak on a ranch or farm in Canada. We must take every precaution and use every tool in our took box to ensure we protect our farm families. We know that agriculture and agri-food is going to be a critical pillar of our economy moving forward. To ensure that it can reach its full potential, our farm families need to know that the Government of Canada and the House of Commons stand with them, will protect them and put these measures in place.

Strengthening the biosecurity measures for trespassers is something farmers, ranchers, food processors and farm groups across the country all support. In fact, I have letters from dozens of agriculture and stakeholders groups that are strongly in support of this legislation. I am glad to hear that the Minister of Agriculture has also spoken out, saying the actions of extremist groups protesting on dairy farms are unacceptable, and it is a concern for her. That is good to hear.

We have the support of the Canadian Federation of Agriculture, for example, which said, “The CFA supports in principle, and encourages, [this] private member's bill to support Canadian farmers who have been negatively impacted by activism. We believe that the introduction of this bill is an important and necessary step in the right direction.”

The Canadian Dairy Farmers of Canada said that Canadian dairy farmers were committed to the best care of our herds and were fully engaged in adhering to the highest standards of animal welfare, food quality and biosecurity, and that the amendments proposed by me to the Health of Animals Act would further protect the health and security of our animals.

As I said, the bill would not prohibit peaceful protesting by those groups that want to make a statement on animal welfare, and I appreciate that, but it would ensure the security on our farms and help with the mental health of Canadian farm families.

I hope members in the House will continue to support this legislation, as they did in the previous Parliament. It is very important that we send a leadership message that we support our farm families, that we understand the importance of biosecurity on farms and the protocols that are in place, and that we will protect the mental health of our farm families.

I am speaking especially of families like the Binnendyks and the Tschetters that work hard every single day. These are family generational farms that do all they can to protect their animals, but they also grow high-quality food for Canadian families and food that is exported around the world, helping us feed the world as well. They understand the steps they must take to protect their animals, but they do not understand when protesters cross the line onto private property and, in many cases, do not understand what they do.

I look forward to engaging with my colleagues as we work together to address this very important issue of protecting Canada's food supply, protecting our supply chain and standing up for Canadian farm families.

[Labour, April 20th, 2023]

Mr. Speaker, why is the Prime Minister not the one standing up and answering for his own failures? Why is the Prime Minister not standing up and doing his job? I will tell members why. He is not worried about lines at passport offices, because he has never had to stand in one. He is not worried about the chaos at the airports, because he has a private jet. He is not worried about skyrocketing food prices or Canadians scavenging from dumpsters to feed their families, because he does not have to pay for it. He is certainly not worried about struggling small businesses, because he has never had to balance a budget.

When will the Prime Minister stand up, do his job and douse this dumpster fire he has created?

[Labour, April 20th, 2023]

Mr. Speaker, let me get this straight. The Prime Minister has increased the spending and the bureaucracy by 50%, and increased the cost of the public sector by more than $21 billion, yet the vital services Canadians rely on, whether immigration, passport or airport services, have never been this dysfunctional. In fact, we now have 150,000 public sector workers on strike, the largest job action in more than 40 years. Who can possibly be that incompetent? Only the Prime Minister can spend so much to achieve so little.

Will the Prime Minister stand up, do his job and fix the government he has broken?

[Financial Protection for Fresh Fruit and Vegetable Farmers Act, April 19th, 2023]

Madam Speaker, before I begin my remarks on this bill, which was brought forward by my colleague from York—Simcoe, I want to say that I appreciate having the support of all the opposition parties on this very important private member's bill. However, in response to my NDP colleague, I am also extremely proud to have been part of a government that eliminated the Wheat Board and gave Canadian farmers marketing freedom and never-before-seen success. That is something farmers are extremely proud of.

Again, I want to thank my colleague from York—Simcoe. Certainly, I think all of us in the House appreciate his passion for his riding, or what he would call the “soup and salad bowl” of the country.

I had the opportunity to tour the Holland Marsh with my colleague last fall, and I had the chance to get down, get my hands dirty and harvest celery and carrots. This is something that does not really happen very often in southern Alberta in the foothills. That was an opportunity to see first-hand the dedication and commitment of those farm families to grow and produce the finest-quality fresh fruit and produce anywhere in the world. It just shows why this legislation, this private member's bill, is so important. It aims to create a limited statutory deemed trust to provide critical financial protection and assurance to our producers of these perishable fruits and vegetables in the event that a purchaser becomes bankrupt or goes into receivership.

I want to mention that the Liberals could bring forward this legislation any time. Interestingly, their 2015 election platform committed to follow through on exactly what my colleague has brought forward today. It is another promise made and another promise broken; it has been almost nine years, and they have yet to follow through on that election commitment.

Again it falls upon the Conservatives to do what the Liberals have failed to do and stand up for Canadian farmers. This legislation would ensure that produce sellers have priority access to an insolvent buyer's cash, inventory and accounts related to the sale of fresh produce.

The current rules severely limit the ability for produce growers and sellers to collect payment when their buyers declare bankruptcy. This is unique, as my colleague from York—Simcoe said, because if a distributor or a vendor went bankrupt, many times those products could be returned to the producer. Electronics, a bicycle or whatever the commodity or product was, it could be returned.

Obviously, with fresh fruit and vegetables, it is a very different situation. Either the product is consumed, or it rots in the warehouse, leaving the producer nothing. They cannot resell it because it has expired and rotted. They cannot collect the product back from the bankrupt retailer.

First, I want to give a bit of background on where we stand. The United States Perishable Agriculture Commodities Act, which many of us have heard referred to as PACA, provides protection to producers of perishable products in the case of a buyer's bankruptcy or insolvency. More specifically, it protects fresh fruit and vegetable growers.

The PACA provisions require buyers to maintain a statutory trust on fruit and vegetables received and not yet paid for. The reason for this is as follows: In the case of a business failure or bankruptcy, the debtor's true assets are not available for general distribution to other creditors until valid claims of trust from producers have been satisfied. This is to protect those fresh fruit and vegetable growers. PACA provided Canadian producers with the same rights as their American suppliers.

While Canadian firms had been the only non-U.S. entities benefiting from these same protections when operating in the United States, the lack of a comparable system here in Canada was a trade irritant to the United States. Not surprisingly, in late 2014, the United States revoked Canada's preferential access to PACA's payment dispute resolution mechanism. This was due to Canada's lack of a similar protection here in Canada, and it was stated that the preferential access would not be reinstated until a similar piece of legislation was passed in Parliament.

Again, it brings us back to the Liberal Party's 2015 election promise to do such a thing, which it has not done. As a result of that, fruit and vegetable growers here in Canada have been waiting more than eight years for the Liberals to act on the campaign promise. However, once again, the Liberals have not followed through on that commitment. With their track record when it comes to Canadian agriculture, this is not surprising.

From what we have heard here tonight, certainly this legislation is long overdue, but it seems that when those things come up the Liberals go out of their way to create trade irritants with the United States rather than solving these issues. We have certainly heard that with PACA tonight, front-of-package labelling, animal vaccines and removing critical pest management products from Canadian farmers that are impacting our American colleagues.

We also heard, just in committee today, from the Food Processors of Canada, that higher interest rates, higher input costs and the carbon tax are putting our producers and our processors in a very precarious financial position, putting even more urgency on this type of legislation, which would provide protection and cost certainty for our processors.

Throughout the years, as a long-term sitting member of the Standing Committee on Agriculture and Agri-Food, I know that this type of legislation has been supported unanimously by all the members of the committee. It has been a recommendation in numerous studies that we have done at the agriculture and agri-food committee, and yet the government has yet to act on that. Clearly, this is not a priority for the Minister of Agriculture, for the Minister of Innovation, for the Minister of International Trade or certainly for the Prime Minister. Time and again, the Liberals have targeted farmers with higher carbon taxes, burdensome red tape, removal of valuable pest management tools, and fertilizer tariffs. Liberal mismanagement on important trade files has put these critical international markets at risk.

We also heard from the Fruit and Vegetable Growers of Canada that 44% of fresh fruit and vegetable producers are selling their products at a loss, so there is no question that these bankruptcies and insolvencies can and will happen. In fact, we know they have already happened. Therefore, it is no surprise, when a survey goes out to Canadian farmers asking them if they feel that the current Liberal government is doing a good job supporting agriculture, that only 2% of the farmers surveyed say that they think the Liberals are doing a good job. It is from decisions or inaction on these types of critical pieces of legislation that this frustration and anxiety arise.

When we talk about why this legislation is needed, it only takes one bankruptcy to have a devastating impact throughout the industry, and certainly a ripple effect throughout all of our small rural communities that rely on these family farms. Certainly if we talk to my colleague from York—Simcoe and many of the members of Parliament around his riding, we will hear that the economics of the small communities in those rural areas rely on these industries.

I am sure the government will try to argue that there has been no demonstrated reason why this legislation is needed, but that is simply not true. We already had the Lakeside Produce company in Leamington, Ontario, file for bankruptcy earlier this year. There were 17 Canadian produce companies listed among Lakeside's creditors, totalling more than $1.6 million in unsecured claims. We can imagine the impact that has on the small family farms that are out those dollars and those products. Another 45 produce companies outside Canada, mainly in Mexico and the United States, are owed another $4.85 million. Not only could Canadian companies be in these circumstances, but this is a highly integrated industry and the ripple effects are significant. In addition to Lakeside Produce, in October 2021 a New Brunswick produce retailer declared bankruptcy, with more than $3 million owing to its creditors, including farmers and wholesale produce retailers.

It is absolutely critical that we give our fresh fruit and produce farm families this assurance, this economic safety net and certainly this protection so they can go about their business knowing that a bankruptcy will not put their own farm at risk. Also, as Canadians, we need this protection to ensure that our food security is protected.

I would encourage all members of this House to support this private member's bill and support Canadian farmers.

[Carbon Pricing, March 30th, 2023]

Mr. Speaker, what a surprise. The Liberal carbon tax is not revenue-neutral and actually costs Canadians thousands of dollars a year. It is only going to get worse when the Liberal-NDP costly coalition increases the carbon tax on Saturday. We know when they triple the carbon tax, it will cost Canadian farmers $150,000 a year, but every single Canadian will pay the price when they buy bread, pasta, fruit, vegetables and milk. Higher carbon taxes mean higher inflation and higher food prices.

How high does the price of bread need to be before the Prime Minister realizes Canadians cannot afford it anymore and axes the carbon tax?

[Questions Passed as Orders for Returns, March 29th, 2023]

With regard to the revocation of government security clearances since 2016, broken down by year: (a) how many individuals have had their security clearances revoked for cause (i.e. not as a result of retirement or resignation); (b) of the revocations in (a), how many were due to the individual spying or otherwise acting on behalf of a foreign government; and (c) what is the breakdown of (a) and (b) by department, agency, Crown corporation, or other government entity?

[Carbon Pricing, March 29th, 2023]

Mr. Speaker, if they really cared about the price of food, they would decrease the carbon tax because then Canadians would not need a grocery rebate.

A food professor, Dr. Sylvain Charlebois, said the grocery rebate is not going to help because it is the carbon tax and not climate change that is driving food inflation, and he is right. The Liberals' new spending in this year's budget would cost every Canadian $4,300 a year, and when the Liberals triple the carbon tax, it will cost Alberta families a net loss of $2,200 a year. How many families are going to have to go hungry before the Liberals realize that this is a mistake, and axe the carbon tax?