John Nater

[Questions Passed as Orders for Returns, November 21st, 2022]

With regard to Sport Canada: (a) what are the details of all gifts, including sports tickets, received by officials at Sport Canada since January 1, 2018, including for each the (i) date given (ii) description, (iii) quantity, (iv) value per unit, (v) total value, (vi) title of recipients; and (b) for all gifts that were tickets or included tickets, what are the details of the event, including, for each, the (i) date, (ii) description of event, (iii) location, (iv) sport, if applicable, (v) league or sports organization putting on the event, if applicable, (vi) recipient, (vii) quantity of tickets, (viii) total value of tickets?

[Defeat Duchenne Canada, November 21st, 2022]

Mr. Speaker, in the summer of 1995, John Davidson pushed his son Jesse in his wheelchair across Ontario in what was known as “Jesse’s Journey”. What was the purpose of this journey? It was to raise funds and awareness for Duchenne muscular dystrophy.

In 1998, John walked across Canada to continue the journey. Along the way he would break a Guinness world record for the fastest crossing of Canada by foot, but more importantly, he raised another $1.5 million for Duchenne research. Since then, Jesse’s Journey has granted more than $16 million in research funding.

Twenty-seven years after it all began, Jesse’s Journey is now Defeat Duchenne Canada. The name might have changed, but the purpose remains: a world where those born with Duchenne can live long and healthy lives.

John Davidson, representatives from Defeat Duchenne Canada and Duchenne families, such as grade 7 student James Allen, who is living with Duchenne, are in Ottawa today. I hope all members will join me in welcoming them to Ottawa and committing to the hard work and resources necessary to defeat Duchenne and other rare diseases.

[Department of Foreign Affairs, Trade and Development Act, November 16th, 2022]

Madam Speaker, it is indeed a great honour to rise in the House to contribute to the second reading debate on Bill C-282, an act to amend the Department of Foreign Affairs, Trade and Development Act (supply management).

It is a particular honour any time I get to speak to a bill where I can highlight the work that the hard-working farmers and farm families in Perth—Wellington and across Canada are doing not only to feed Canadians, but quite literally to feed the world.

Bill C-282 may sound familiar to some members and to some Canadians because it is an identical copy of Bill C-216 from the previous Parliament, which was introduced by another Bloc Québécois member of Parliament, the dean of the House of Commons, the hon. member for Bécancour—Nicolet—Saurel. Members will recall that the bill died on the Order Paper when Parliament was dissolved for the unnecessary summer election.

I recognize that both members who introduced this bill have a strong commitment to the supply management industry, which this party and many Canadians across the country certainly support.

I know there are some in this country who may not have the same vigour in supporting supply management, but I think it is important in a bill such as this one that we have a nuanced and thoughtful discussion on its strengths and weaknesses, how it may contribute to the situation, and how it may affect, negatively or positively, future trade deals in decades to come.

I want to talk briefly about food security. If we have learned anything during the past two and a half years of the pandemic, it is the importance of food security. When we have seen broken supply chains and shortages of goods on shelves across the country, it reinforces the necessity of a strong domestic production system.

We need to be able to feed the citizens in our country, but also to export the products that are created here in Canada across the world. I might add that when we have a country that is agriculturally as rich as Canada is, it is a crying shame that there are still Canadians who are food insecure. No Canadian, no person living in this great country of Canada, should be food insecure when we have the great natural benefits of our food production system here in Canada.

I have the honour of representing perhaps the greatest agricultural riding in this country. Perth—Wellington is home to the most dairy farmers of any electoral district in the country. It is home to the most chicken farmers of any electoral district in the country. It is home to the most pork producers of any area in Ontario, and it is in the top five for beef production as well.

Perth—Wellington has some of the most fertile farmland anywhere in the world. It is some of the most productive farmland that we will find anywhere in the country. The cost of that farmland reflects that, as we are now seeing land sales of over $35,000 per acre in Perth—Wellington and across southern Ontario.

I say that to emphasize the importance of the supply managed commodities, but also the non-supply managed commodities as well. Canadians and Canadian agriculture have certainly benefited from supply management, but there are also benefits from the world market that comes with international trade.

I would note that Perth—Wellington is home to more than 62,000 dairy cows, which is more than the number of people who voted in Perth—Wellington in the last election.

According to Statistics Canada, Perth—Wellington has over 350 chicken and egg farmers and produces over 28 million eggs. That is enough to make 9.3 million omelettes if one uses three eggs to make an omelette. We produce, in the combined counties of Huron and Perth, 542,270,559 litres of milk each year. That is enough milk for each Canadian to have a glass of milk for 56 consecutive mornings.

Those same dairy farmers and farm families provide over $1.2 billion to our national gross domestic product, and that is only in the counties of Perth and Huron. If we combine the counties of Wellington, Dufferin, Peel and Simcoe, which produce 385 million litres of milk, that is another $800 million added to Canada's GDP.

Let us remember as well the great influence of new technology on our agriculture sector. Agriculture is at the leading and cutting edge of technology. We have robotic milkers that have made advances in the dairy industry. We see folks in the beef industry making concrete efforts to increase sustainability and decrease greenhouse gas emissions within the industry. They are doing it on their own. They are doing it because it is the right thing to do. It is beneficial to farmers and the industry, who know the benefit and know they are the closest to the environment, the closest to the land on which they are stewards.

I have had the great honour and privilege to visit so many local farms in my community. I know the commitment these farmers and farm families have not only to feeding our communities, but also to playing their part in the great global supply chain and contributing to increased sustainability. It is important that these farmers have a fair and predictable marketplace where they can compete domestically and, for those who export, internationally.

All is not well in the agriculture industry. Certainly, farmers and farm families are facing the brunt of the inflation crisis and the challenges within the supply chain failures that have been caused by the Liberal government. Fuel, heat, feed, fertilizer, equipment, all of these costs are increasing at a rate that is not sustainable. One proposal from this official opposition is doing one small part to make that better. Bill C-234, an act to amend the Greenhouse Gas Pollution Pricing Act, would exempt natural gas and propane from the carbon tax for on-farm use. Canadians know that when farmers are drying their grains they need those things and for the government to apply the carbon tax just does not make sense. I am pleased that bill has finally made it out of committee and will be returning to this House for report stage and third reading debate. I am very pleased that my friend and colleague from Huron—Bruce was the one who was able to shepherd the bill through.

What we are seeing as well are the fertilizer tariffs. We still have not seen meaningful action from the government regarding the costs that were imposed on Canadian farmers for fertilizer purchased before March 2. In fact, just today I received another letter from the Minister of Agriculture, as I had begged her to address this, and once again she has failed to provide an encouraging response on this matter.

Farmers and farm families need support and reassurance from the federal government, not ongoing challenges, including, I might add, the unfair, unscientific approach to front-of-pack labelling. The government was finally forced to back down from having it on ground beef and other single ingredient products.

The Liberal government unfortunately neglects too many farmers and farm families in the agriculture industry. In fact, if anyone had listened to the fall economic statement earlier this month, they would have found that a focus on agriculture was sorely lacking.

I recognize that this bill, Bill C-282, is largely a reaction to concessions that the Liberal government made in the Canada-United States-Mexico agreement, the CUSMA, in which further concessions were made for dairy, poultry and eggs. I would note that it was under our Conservative government, under the strong leadership of the former minister, the member for Abbotsford, that Canada committed to trade deals with dozens of international countries, where we expanded our foreign markets, all while ensuring the supply management industry was properly protected. That is the approach the Conservative government has taken in the past and one that would be taken in the future.

Certainly, this bill has some challenges in how it would be implemented and how it would be dealt with at the negotiation table, but that is something that could be considered at the committee stage. It is important that the bill be given a thorough examination at the Standing Committee on Agriculture and Agri-Food.

Recognizing that my time is dwindling, I shall move on to the final point, which is the importance of our agriculture and agri-food industry, which not only feeds our country, but helps to feed the world.

[Fall Economic Statement Implementation Act, 2022, November 16th, 2022]

Mr. Speaker, we are talking about the cost of living increases that Canadians are being faced with and what the government can do to help those Canadians right now. One of the things that we have heard time and again is about the tripling of the carbon tax and the impact it is going to have on home heating, gas and groceries. Would the member agree that all Canadians can be helped right now and give some assurance that the government will just stop and cancel that increase on the carbon tax?

[Questions Passed as Orders for Returns, November 16th, 2022]

With regard to contracts signed or entered into by the government with Russian vendors since January 1, 2022, and broken down by department, agency, Crown corporation, or other government entity: (a) what are the details of each contract signed with vendors based out of Russia or with a mailing address in Russia, including, for each, the (i) date, (ii) value, (iii) vendor, (iv) description or goods or services being provided, including quantity, (v) duration of contract, if applicable, (vi) file number; (b) for each contract in (a), was it sole-sourced or awarded through a competitive bid process; (c) have any of the contracts in (a) been amended or cancelled as a result of the Russian invasion of Ukraine earlier this year, and, if so, which ones and how was the contract changed; and (d) have any other government contracts been amended or cancelled as a result of the Russian invasion of Ukraine earlier this year, and, if so, what are the details, including, for each, the (i) date, (ii) value, (iii) vendor, (iv) description or goods or services being provided, including quantity, (v) duration of contract, if applicable, (vi) file number, (vii) how the contract was changed?

[Questions Passed as Orders for Returns, November 3rd, 2022]

With regard to spending by Canadian Heritage on Canada Day festivities on Parliament Hill and in the National Capital Region since 2010: what was the total amount (i) allocated, (ii) spent, on the festivities, broken down by year?

[Food Day in Canada Act, November 1st, 2022]

Madam Speaker, I request a recorded division.

[Food Day in Canada Act, November 1st, 2022]

Madam Speaker, it is indeed an honour to conclude the debate at second reading of Bill S-227.

The story of food day in Canada did not start in the House and it did not start in the other place where it was first introduced. The story of food day in Canada started in the dark days of the summer of 2003 when the agriculture industry, the beef industry in particular, was wreaked with havoc due to the BSE crisis.

In those dark days of the agriculture industry in 2003, one person stood up and said, “Let's do something positive.” That one person was Anita Stewart. She celebrated the first food day in Canada back in 2003, and Bill S-227 now honours that legacy, commends the resiliency of Canadian farmers and celebrates everyone who contributes to the world-class agriculture and agri-food system in Canada.

I want to thank the members who have spoken in favour of this bill during this debate, including the members for Glengarry—Prescott—Russell, Cowichan—Malahat—Langford, Abitibi—Baie-James—Nunavik—Eeyou, Chatham-Kent—Leamington, Tobique—Mactaquac, Berthier—Maskinongé, Skeena—Bulkley Valley, Vimy and Beauport—Côte-de-Beaupré—Île d'Orléans—Charlevoix.

I want to especially thank Senator Rob Black for introducing this bill in the other place and the members for Wellington—Halton Hills and Guelph who also gave passionate speeches in this place about the history of food day in Canada, Wellington County's Anita Stewart and her lifetime of work to promote Canadian food. I know that her sons, Jeff, Mark, Brad and Paul, would be grateful to see their late mother recognized in such a way.

I am pleased to know that Bill S-227 has the support of so many members in the House, perhaps even unanimously, and I look forward to seeing this bill passed at second reading. I also hope members on the Standing Committee on Agriculture and Agri-Food will find a way to ensure that the bill passes with all haste when it comes to committee.

As I mentioned in the House, food day in Canada has been informally recognized in Wellington County, in some rural communities and in some large cities across Canada for nearly 20 years. We now have the chance and the opportunity to pass Bill S-227 in the House and formally recognize food day in Canada across Canada.

[Telecommunications Act, October 31st, 2022]

Madam Speaker, it is a pleasure to rise today to debate Bill C-288, an act to amend the Telecommunications Act concerning transparent and accurate broadband services information.

I was originally planning to speak to the predecessor of this bill on June 23, 2021. There is nothing like 16 months of intervening time to allow me to really collect my thoughts on this matter, but I am pleased that my colleague and friend from Dauphin—Swan River—Neepawa has revived his bill from the previous Parliament to provide Canadian consumers with the important information they need when it comes to rural broadband services across our country, so I thank him for raising this issue.

Something I have said many times in the House of Commons and in public to my constituents at events is that reliable high-speed Internet ceased being a luxury a long time ago. For Canadian families, businesses and communities, it is an absolute necessity. When members are given the opportunity to bring forward private member's bills, there are often a lot of competing priorities, which members see as being important to their communities and their ridings. When members win the lottery and have a high-up number in the private member's business lottery, like my friend from Dauphin—Swan River—Neepawa did, it is great when they are able to pick a priority like this, which is important for folks not only in rural communities like Dauphin—Swan River—Neepawa, but also in places like Perth—Wellington and across the country.

In my community of Perth—Wellington, the issue of rural broadband is one I hear of time and again. On a nearly weekly basis, if not sometimes on a daily basis, I will receive an email from a constituent, a phone call from a family, sometimes even a printed letter in the mail because the Internet is so bad, asking when they might finally see rural broadband fibre optics coming to their communities. Just this morning I spoke with a business owner in Wellington North, in the north part of Wellington County, who was talking about how his business was affected by not having access to reliable high-speed Internet. The speeds he is able to get, based on his current Internet service provider, are simply not adequate for him to carry out his business.

Later today, after I have downloaded this video and upload it to my website, my Facebook page and YouTube, many of the constituents in my riding will not be able to watch it. They will not be able to watch it because their high-speed Internet is simply not adequate. They would spend most of the day watching it buffering rather than actually watching this, or any other video or business communication.

There are challenges affecting Internet across the country. I will be honest that it takes a lot of infrastructure investment in order to get reliable Internet and telecommunications services in a country as large, rural and remote as Canada. One of the challenges is that there are very few Internet service providers in Canada, and this market is dominated by a couple of large corporations.

I do not think it is a surprise to anyone in this chamber who those large corporations are that dominate the marketplace. This lack of competition leads to the lack of choice for Canadians. In many parts of my riding, my constituents have no choice and are stuck with one provider. In a lot of cases, that is old ma Bell herself.

There are several, often community-owned, Internet service providers that are trying to do the hard work to make sure that fibre is installed along every concession road. They are trying hard. They are working hard, and they are committed to providing reliable high-speed Internet, but they are often unable or struggling to compete with the large Internet service providers that often engage in marketing that, while legal, is really pushing the boundaries of what is believable and consistent.

In my riding, I am very proud of community businesses such as Quadro, Wightman and Mornington, which are working to connect rural subscribers and rural residents with fibre-optic Internet service that would have up to one gigabyte of download speeds. This is an amount that is simply unbelievable for so many in my community right now because they are dealing with speeds as low as 2.5 Mbps, megabytes per second, which is simply not sufficient to carry on a business, participate in community events or communicate with family members.

Canadians need accurate information about the speed of their Internet service, which is why I support this bill. The theoretical speeds, hypothetical service and best-case scenarios are all advertising mechanisms that some of these large corporations use. They hinder us and prevent us from making meaningful decisions when deciding what Internet service provider to go with.

What does help Canadian consumers is realistic expectations based on data regarding what the download and upload speeds are going to be with the specific Internet service provider in their community.

Let us step back just a little to look at what has been happening in the past number of years. Throughout the first 15 years of the 21st century, Internet access expanded dramatically. Service, quality and speeds increased during that period, albeit not always consistently across the country.

What we have seen in the last seven or so years is that progress has slowed and stalled. In fact, I would say that the progress of the government on expanding high-speed Internet across the country has been slower than dial-up. I have raised this issue of poor Internet service time and time again with different Liberal members of cabinet over these past seven years. Unfortunately, the responses we get are either disappointing or, quite frankly, misleading.

The Liberal government has pointed to the different federal funds and dollar totals that it claims to have invested, but in typical Liberal fashion, it measures success based on the amount of money it spends rather than on the actual results it achieves.

One small example of this is when, in November 2018, I raised a question during question period about a report that was criticizing the government's failed process to improve rural Internet. I raised this in question period, and the now Attorney General, who was the parliamentary secretary at the time, responded simply by telling me how much more money they were spending, how many more dollars were being put into it rather than focusing on results. Here we are, four years later, and people in rural and remote communities across Canada simply do not have access.

I will note that some other strategies have been promoted more broadly on the issue of spectrum. I would note that the government still has not followed up on the use it or lose it policy that would actually make sure that spectrum is actually used and not kept in corporate coffers as some kind of bargaining chip or future asset that they could sell or re-sell in the future.

Many of the projects being funded across the country have gone to some of these large telecom companies rather than going to the smaller telecoms. In fact, I would note that the so-called rapid response stream of the universal broadband fund gave $7 million of taxpayer funding to Bell in November 2020, whereas a lot of small, local, often community-owned, Internet service providers in rural communities could have used that $7 million to actually get fibre in the ground.

I would note as well, in terms of the failure of the Liberal government, that despite the fact that 10% of the underserved population lives in southern Ontario, the Liberal government's connect to innovate program did not invest a single dime in southern Ontario. Again, there was a big show, lots of announcements, the citing of big dollar figures, but 10% of the population is not being served in Ontario.

There is a program in southern Ontario, the SWIFT program, which is a collaboration among Internet service providers, municipalities, counties and private business. Hopefully, at some point there will be some further funding from different levels of government because they are ready to do the work necessary to make sure that fibre is in the home of all Canadians. However, when it comes to the program like the connect to innovate program, not a single dollar is being invested in southern Ontario.

I want to refocus on why this bill is important. As the member for Dauphin—Swan River—Neepawa mentioned earlier, the phrase “up to speeds” and misleading types of advertising are simply not acceptable when Canadians are making important decisions about rural high-speed Internet. We need to do more. We need to act. I am very excited to support Bill C-288.

[Business of Supply, October 25th, 2022]

Madam Speaker, there is the ceremonial element of the monarchy that allows it to be separate and apart from the political day-to-day hustling we see in this place and across the country. I think it is important that we have a distinction between the head of state and the head of government. It allows political actors to do their jobs while remaining a dignified part of the monarchy, represented here in Canada by the Governor General.