Kevin Sorenson

[Business of Supply, March 21st, 2017]

Mr. Speaker, I want to commend my colleague for a great speech. When she mentioned in the lobby earlier that she was going to speak on infrastructure, I thought that would be a great opportunity for us to learn about the failed infrastructure program of the Liberal government. That is what we have here.

We know that tomorrow we are going to hear a budget that will be written in red ink again. We will be neck-deep in deficit. It will be another spend, spend budget, and yet the delivery of a lot of infrastructure, as the member pointed out, will not happen.

In the previous government, we saw the largest infrastructure program ever, the $75 billion Building Canada fund. We saw those projects delivered. Today, in Alberta, for example, the Liberals have announced money for infrastructure where the province is now talking about taking the packet for municipalities and putting it into provincial general revenue. There is no infrastructure money getting down to the municipalities. There are no projects under way. There are no projects that are even really being planned in smaller communities.

Could my colleague comment on that type of program, a failed program of the Liberal government?

[Business of Supply, March 21st, 2017]

Mr. Speaker, the leader of my party gave a great speech, contrasting former budgets with what we are seeing today.

One thing we all know here in this House is that tomorrow's budget will be written in red ink. It will all be red ink. There will be no talk about balanced budgets; there will be no plan. The Prime Minister made the commitment and promised that; and right away, in the first budget, backed away from it. We know that will not be mentioned. We know that the other contrast with former Conservative budgets was that we lowered taxes to increase economic growth opportunities for people and for business. We know that will not happen. The government has committed to new taxation, whether it is payroll taxes or small business taxes. Those are some of the things we know about.

We know that in former budgets Conservatives supported families, especially seniors. We created things like tax-free savings accounts and changes to the RRIF and universal child care benefits. We know the government is bent on taking those tax breaks away and creating new taxes.

The leader of my party mentioned in her speech a number of job-creating opportunities that the budget could have. I am wondering if she would elaborate a bit on that. The government has backed away from tax cuts to small and medium-sized business. If we talk about middle class, we cannot really speak about middle class without talking about small and medium-sized business.

I would ask the leader of my party to elaborate a little on missed opportunities and things the government should be bringing forward to help businesses that are the job creators.

[Questions Passed as Orders for Return, January 30th, 2017]

With regard to boil water advisories on First Nations Reserves: (a) how many advisories are currently in place; (b) which reserves are currently under a boil water advisory; (c) for each reserve listed in (b), how many individuals are currently under a boil water advisory; (d) when is each boil water advisory expected to be lifted; and (e) for each reserve listed in (b), what are the details of any funding which has been delivered for water infrastructure projects including (i) the date that the funds were received by the reserve, (ii) specific projects which funds were provided for, (iii) title and file number of related press release?

[Questions on the Order Paper, January 30th, 2017]

With regard to the government and middle-class Canadians: (a) what is the government’s definition of the middle-class; and (b) what salary range does the government consider to be middle-class for (i) individuals, (ii) couples, (iii) families?

[Petitions, December 1st, 2016]

Mr. Speaker, I have the honour to present five petitions signed by over 100 constituents of mine in Battle River—Crowfoot. They call on the government to recognize natural health products as being just that: natural. They are concerned that the changes proposed by the Liberal government will be a step backward. They want the proposals by the Minister of Health to be null and void. The petitioners are from different areas of my riding: Bashaw, Camrose, Round Hill, Hardisty, Bawlf, Sedgewick, New Norway, Daysland, Strome, Killam, and Wainwright.

[Natural Resources, November 28th, 2016]

Mr. Speaker, EVRAZ is the biggest producer of large diameter line pipe for oil and gas transmission in North America and employs over 1,000 Canadians, including Canadians in my riding. It manufactures 100% made-in-Canada pipe, from scrap to steel to pipe. EVRAZ produces over one million tonnes of steel annually from recycled metal.

Conrad Winkler, president and CEO of EVRAZ, visited me in Ottawa today to point out that every tonne of recycled steel saves 1.8 tonnes of greenhouse gas emissions, emitting 79% less than Chinese steel and using 64% less electricity.

The infrastructure needed for Canada's pipelines can be made right here in Canada by Canadians for Canadians. EVRAZ is a classic example of a creator of good paying, skilled, middle-class jobs.

Pipelines bring jobs to operators, oil and gas drillers, and many other firms in local communities. The previous Conservative government approved numerous pipelines. The Liberal government needs to do the same.

[Agriculture and Agri-Food, November 24th, 2016]

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to be working with ranchers from central Alberta who have come to Parliament with the Canadian beef producers to make the government aware of measures required to deal with the detection of bovine tuberculosis in some herds, and the quarantine of these animals. They testified before the agriculture committee, and I am pleased to be one of the members of Parliament who wrote to the Minister of Agriculture, spelling out what is needed.

Lives and livelihoods are being destroyed as the slow pace of testing proceeds. They need funding to cover the additional feed costs caused by the CFIA's mandatory quarantine. They need the CFIA to consider having local veterinarians speed up testing. They need to feed their calves, which should already have been sold, so that they can pay their bills.

The 34 families in the ranching businesses affected by this situation appreciate the actions to assure compensation for animals that must be destroyed.

I hope that the minister takes their requests seriously, so that ranchers and producers—

[Rouge National Urban Park Act, November 24th, 2016]

Mr. Speaker, I want to thank the minister for coming to speak on this important topic, which actually our Conservative government began. I commend her for bringing this forward again.

More and more we see urban creep taking a lot of prime farm land. I come from a rural riding, where we understand that they are not making any more dirt. They are not making any more farm land, or very little.

Although the minister may say that agricultural practices are protected and will be protected in the bill, is it going to be strong enough so that years down the road, as environmentalists come forward and view the agricultural practices that are taking place within this park, they will be protected? Can the minister make the commitment that those agricultural practices, those farmers, are not going to be displaced years down the road when the policies of a provincial or federal government may change?

[Agriculture and Agri-Food, November 21st, 2016]

Mr. Speaker, dozens of Alberta ranchers have been ordered not to sell their cattle that are under CFIA quarantine. These ranchers do not have the facilities, the feed, or the financial resources to feed their cattle over the winter. They are being forced to pay thousands of dollars to feed cattle that normally would have been sold by now so they could meet their bills.

Will the Liberal government commit to an emergency relief program to help pay the feed costs for the herds that have been quarantined by the CFIA?

[Controlled Drugs and Substances Act, November 17th, 2016]

Mr. Speaker, that is a very good question. When we start making these changes, is it going to drive the price way up? Are there only a few companies that have this technology? Those are all good questions.

The United States has adopted this in great measure. It is like anything else, it will initially drive up the cost between 8% and 12%. Most said that it was closer to 9.5%.

However, once the pharmaceutical companies see that there is a will of Parliament to move in this direction, many pharmaceutical companies can move on this very quickly. Like anything else, as more and more come on board, as we have heard, and I have talked to many of them, the price of this will again go down.

The member's other question was whether it would change the formulation of the drug. If the pill is changed so it cannot be crushed, will it still solve the pain people experience? The pharmaceutical companies assure us that pain relief and the active ingredient in the prescribed drug would remain constant and strong, but it could not be abused to degree it is now.