Kevin Sorenson

[Sponsorship Program, February 17th, 2004]

Mr. Speaker, yesterday the Deputy Prime Minister repeatedly blew off answering questions in the House and instead kept referring to the inquiry.

What she failed to mention, however, was exactly what the timelines were on this public inquiry. Canadians deserve to know the timelines. They deserve to know that the inquiry will be held in a timely manner. Canadians deserve answers and they deserve the truth.

My question is for the Deputy Prime Minister. What are the exact dates for the start and completion of the public inquiry into the sponsorship scandal?

[Agriculture, February 17th, 2004]

Mr. Speaker, in the throne speech the Liberal government claimed that farmers would not be left “to bear alone the consequences of circumstances beyond their control”, and yet there was no action plan. There was no compensation scheme or remedial ideas to get the border open. Nothing. Zilch.

There was only a conglomeration of empty words, and once again ranchers and farmers in this country have been left holding the bag.

The bright light of our once prosperous cattle industry is all but extinguished, as nothing except financial ruin appears on the horizon for many cattle ranchers.

I implore the government to do everything and anything within its power to get those borders open. Also, it is imperative that there is a concrete plan in place in the event that the borders do not open, a reality that farmers and ranchers may soon face.

Please, for once, make good on a promise. Do not leave cattle ranchers and farmers alone to bear the consequences of this disaster, which is far beyond their control.

[Government Contracts, February 12th, 2004]

Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister said that anyone who knew anything and did nothing should resign. He also said that only a few Quebec ministers were aware of the scandal. They knew of the scandal.

Will he name who they are and if they are in his cabinet, will he stand here and ask them to resign?

[Government Contracts, February 12th, 2004]

Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister just announced in his hastily called press conference that very few Quebec ministers knew the full extent of the scandal. He also said that anyone who knows anything about the scandal should come forward before they are summoned.

My question is for the Prime Minister. If he knows that there are cabinet ministers who are aware of this, will he stand in this House today and disclose who those ministers are?

[Petitions, February 11th, 2004]

Mr. Speaker, pursuant to Standing Order 36 I have the privilege to present to the House a petition signed by concerned constituents from my riding of Crowfoot, more specifically, individuals from the areas of Camrose, Ohaton, Bawlf, Meeting Creek, Rosalind, Alberta.

The petitioners call upon the government to pass legislation to recognize the institution of marriage in federal law as being the union of one man and one woman to the exclusion of all others.

I take a great deal of privilege and pleasure in introducing this petition.

[Auditor General's Report, February 10th, 2004]

Mr. Speaker, this Prime Minister is the Sergeant Schultz of Canadian politics: he sees nothing, he hears nothing, he does nothing, but he is aware of everything. He was the second most powerful minister in Quebec. Indeed, he was the second most powerful minister in all of the country. The Prime Minister could have spoken up but he did not. Why did he remain silent?

[Auditor General's Report, February 10th, 2004]

Mr. Speaker, this Prime Minister has stated, “I was a member of cabinet. And the whole essence of cabinet is that you accept responsibility for what the government does...”.

This Prime Minister's five year silence on the sponsorship program has cost Canadian taxpayers $250 million. Why did this Prime Minister continue to give his seal of approval every time he signed those cheques?

[Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy, February 4th, 2004]

Mr. Chair, I want to comment on the minister's address here tonight. I do appreciate one thing about his speech. Unlike many of the other speeches I have heard from the government side tonight, I have not heard a lot of answers as to what we should do. I have heard that we need to keep working to keep the border open and that we need to keep talking to the Americans. However, what happens if that border does not open? What happens if we are in this thing for the long term? At least tonight he suggested that we start looking at certain things.

Before coming here tonight I had the chance to speak to two constituents. One lady from the New Norway-Ferintosh area posed a question to me. She asked me why no one was doing anything. We have shown the genetic lines, we have done the testing and the CFIA has done its job but there seems to be no plan B.

One of the comments that the member for Miramichi made was that we should begin to question the feeding of animal byproducts, bone meal and others, to other animals that will be put into the food consumption.

If the member believes the producers of our nation are saying that we should ban all animal byproducts being fed to other animals for human consumption and if he believes that consumers here and around the world are asking for the same thing, then why has the government not stepped forward and said that this is something that perhaps it should consider?

It seems that the government is very reactive but not very proactive. We have seen cases like SARS where there was no plan. The BSE issue has no plan. What happens if the border does not open?

Would the member recommend to the minister of agriculture that we stop all animal byproducts from being fed to other animals that are going to enter the human food chain?

[Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy, February 4th, 2004]

Mr. Chair, approximately three and a half years ago I stood in the House when at that time we were very concerned about an impending crisis in the agricultural sector and certainly in the beef sector as we saw television programs of burning carcasses in Great Britain.

Everyone will remember the emergency debates we had regarding the foot and mouth disease back then, because we realized that the industry was a fragile industry. We realized that if foot and mouth were to hit Canada, the borders would slam closed. This summer as I was travelling, I suddenly heard that we had an isolated BSE incident in Canada. The same fate as there was for foot and mouth was not what we experienced. We have a closed border.

We are here tonight because there is a crisis and it is a fragile industry. It is a very fragile industry. In fact, some would say that the death of the industry is upon us. Action is what is required right now.

I was very dismayed tonight as I sat here and listened not to our agriculture minister but to a former minister in the government who said that he believed we need to play hardball with the Americans right now, that the only game they understand is a tough response and we need to play that type of hardball. He says we need to look at other markets.

I very sincerely wish that before the government begins this hardball game with the United States it finds and accesses those other markets. To be quite frank, we have not seen that coming out of this department yet. My question to this member is, does she agree with those comments from the government side that we should play hardball?

The second issue is with regard to the feeding of animal byproducts to other animals. What measures are going to have to be put in place somewhere down the road? What measures does she believe are going to have to be put in place in order for us to show consumers that there is a safe meat supply here?

[Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy, February 4th, 2004]

Mr. Chair, Canadians are wondering what the Department of Agriculture and Agri-Food will look like under this minister's watch?

Some programs have come out already. The federal cull cow program is not working in this country. More specifically, has the minister considered the depopulation of some of these older cows? Has the minister considered how much better it may be to compensate now rather than incur a major expenditure later? What is the minister's plan as far as testing every animal or testing more animals after 30 months? What is the Department of Agriculture--