Larry Maguire

[Strengthening Environmental Protection for a Healthier Canada Act, October 31st, 2022]

Mr. Speaker, the bill is before the House. Many of us on the Conservative side of the House have stated we are in favour of the bill. I even pointed out in my presentation the types of witnesses that I hope go before the committee when it is discussing Bill S-5, this environmental management bill. None of us wants toxic substances.

I pointed out very clearly in my presentation tonight what is required in the agricultural industry to keep it vibrant. There have been huge technological changes and improvements made in the environmental use of products in the agricultural industry, and I use it as an example only because it is one I am familiar with. The same thing applies in forestry, mining and many other industries as well.

[Strengthening Environmental Protection for a Healthier Canada Act, October 31st, 2022]

Mr. Speaker, I thank my hon. colleague for his concern and for raising that with me. I do appreciate that fact, but I want to point out that we are in favour of moving the bill through second reading. I am, at least, and I am sure my colleagues are as well. However, I think this is very relevant because I am coming to the point where I want to say what I hope happens at committee with the bill. At the end of the day, farmers want a science-led approval process that is based in fact rather than hyperbole.

With that in mind, I will reference some very sage words that my friend and colleague Senator Robert Black said while debating this legislation. His words are incredibly important, so I would like to quote him directly because we have not really had a review since back in the 1980s with regard to soil science in Canada. He said:

...I have recently learned from a few agricultural stakeholders that there are minor concerns about the inclusion of and language around a precautionary principle throughout the bill, particularly since it states that a weight-of-evidence approach and a precautionary approach should be taken.

Members of the agricultural community are concerned that it’s commonly understood that a precautionary approach is used in the absence of data. A weight-of-evidence approach, on the other hand, suggests there is evidence in place.

While the balance between the precautionary principle and weight-of-evidence approaches referenced in the bill isn’t new, as it already is in CEPA, there is a need for clarity as to how it is to be applied to the broader subset of potentially toxic substances this bill brings into CEPA consideration.

It is important to note that there is existing guidance on how the two are balanced by Environment and Climate Change Canada. However, agricultural stakeholders have highlighted the critical need to ensure the end result is as fully informed decision making as possible. And I agree with their concern that Canadian regulators should have a clear mandate to pursue additional evidence where it’s found lacking.

Ultimately, given the important role this bill will play in evaluating substances present in our environment, I believe that where there is an absence of data, there should be legislated processes and mechanisms to request more data. I am hopeful that members of this chamber will consider such a matter at committee and investigate how we can possibly strengthen this bill to ensure its success.

I will close by saying that I echo what Senator Black had to say, and I hope the committee that ultimately studies this legislation, which is what I referenced earlier, invites numerous agricultural witnesses to get a fulsome analysis of their views on the bill. A prime example, in reference to Senator Sparrow, is the study he did and the books he wrote about the development and protection of our soils, which are completely relevant in this whole area. Although some may say that the agricultural industry is a bit of a stretch from Bill S-5, it is completely relevant if we listen to my colleagues who have already spoken to the bill. They noted food security in the future and being able to make sure that we have fertilizer for use in production and for maintaining but hopefully increasing the food supply in the world, because it is under attack as we speak.

I, for one, welcome the modernization management plan in Canada, if done correctly, with the aim of improving the environment and having an efficient process for crop protection products to be approved.

[Strengthening Environmental Protection for a Healthier Canada Act, October 31st, 2022]

Mr. Speaker, it is my pleasure to add some comments on Bill S-5 tonight.

I want to take this opportunity to thank all of my colleagues, members of the House and our colleagues in the Senate for the hard work and insightful debate that has already occurred on this legislation. As someone who farmed for decades and who was actively involved in many agricultural organizations, I was always attuned to concerns regarding the federal government's policies and regulations.

When I was first elected in the Manitoba Legislature, Premier Filmon, now the former premier, asked me take on the role of the environment, to be the shadow minister of the environment in Manitoba. I wondered why that would be so important to him at that time. I suddenly realized, with all of my farming and agricultural background, that the environment would probably be one of the most important issues facing agriculture in the next 30 years. It certainly has been in the last 25 years or so. That was a very important role to play.

A lot of the time we would rely on farmer-led organizations to keep us abreast of what the government was doing, particularly on approving crop protection products that we wanted to use as farmers. Some of the time we would get news reports and would have to write our elected officials to tell us what was really happening on the regulatory side of things. Quite frankly, regulations which get determined by departments and Treasury Board cabinet committee do not get sufficient attention in this place.

As farmers know, we must take care of the soil, water and air to ensure that our operations are sustainable. My dad had a quote, something that he taught me very young. He said, “If you look after the land, it will look after you.”

Farmers are stewards of the land, not only because it is the right thing to do, but because it is good for business. In the past couple of decades, there has been a tremendous amount of innovation in the agricultural sector. From the chemical farmers use, to how they apply them, they are light years from where they were back in the days when my father started farming in Elgin, Manitoba.

On the farm, we used crop protection products all the time. One example of this might be the fact that, when I started growing peas in 1971, there were very few chemicals that could be used on them at all. Today, there is a plethora of products out there to kill things, such as thistles, millet and wild oats, and these were not available to farmers in those days.

Due to the advancements in machinery, seed technology and the use of chemicals, farmers are now producing more food per acre than ever before. Hopefully that trend will continue. As our leader, the new leader of the Conservative Party has repeatedly said, we want to make Canada the breadbasket of the world. We have great opportunities.

However, due to the illegal invasion and brutal war currently being carried out in Ukraine by the Putin regime, we recognize how important the Canadian agriculture and agri-food sector is for the world. Some of my colleagues were just referring to the importance of that food production capability earlier this evening.

A lot of the time Canadian farmers would see that crop protection products would be approved in like-minded nations, such as the United States, United Kingdom, Australia and others, while taking a considerable amount of time to get approved in Canada. One example is, when I was a farm leader, we were dealing with products that were used in North Dakota but could not be used in Manitoba because the rules were different between their environmental protection agency and our pest management review board in Canada, in those days. The one that was most important at that time, when I was a wheat grower president, was dealing with fusarium in wheat.

Due to the processes set up, there is always a concern, as I was just referring to, that delays could impede access to the newest and most effective crop protection products available for the agriculture sector. At the end of the day, farmers want—

[Petitions, October 24th, 2022]

Madam Speaker, I too wish to table a petition today in support of Bill S-223, as many of my colleagues in the House from all parties have. It is a bill seeking to combat forced organ harvesting and trafficking that has been before the House for, as my colleagues have said, over 15 years. The petitioners want to see Bill S-223 passed as soon as possible.

[Mental Health, October 20th, 2022]

Madam Chair, I want to thank my colleague for her presentation. I have had the opportunity of being in her Vancouver East riding. I know there are mental health issues across the whole country, but she has some exceptional circumstances in her region, in her constituency and around her.

Could the member elaborate, with respect to the mental health transfer of $900 million a year, $4.5 billion over five years, what she thinks the main issue would be as far as the priority for spending in her constituency?

[Mental Health, October 20th, 2022]

Madam Chair, I want to go back to one of the things that the parliamentary secretary for health just indicated, which is the importance of nutrition with regard to mental health activities. These numbers are from the Canadian Mental Health Association. It says that Canada lags behind some other countries because it spends only about 5% to 7% of its overall health care budget on mental health, whereas some of our OECD colleagues, like France, New Zealand and the Netherlands, spend 10% to 13%.

I wonder if the hon. member could just elaborate on her thoughts with regard to the importance of nutrition, given the cost of nutrition in her home region.

[Mental Health, October 20th, 2022]

Madam Chair, I have a question that maybe sums up why we should find the money for the $4.5-billion mental health transfer. Poor mental health costs Canada about $50 billion a year. We are talking about not even a tenth of what it costs us in lost quality of life, work and other areas that take people away from things because of mental health situations. Could the member expand on that?

[Mental Health, October 20th, 2022]

Madam Chair, earlier I mentioned that I did not think we had enough resources all across the country, but particularly in rural areas. I know my colleague comes from a rural area in Alberta.

I wonder if he could expand on that as well.

[Mental Health, October 20th, 2022]

Madam Chair, I want to thank my hon. colleague for her presentation tonight and the personal experience she shared with us in the House. Many of us have had similar circumstances in our families with relatives and those close to us.

There are many things I would like to ask her, but as she mentioned a 15-year-old in this case, I want to ask what she thinks we should do for the youth side of mental health, given that about one in four people impacted by mental health is under the age she mentioned and this is more than just an education process.

[Mental Health, October 20th, 2022]

Madam Chair, my colleague has worked at the immigration committee for a long time. I was there a few years ago, and we worked together then.

That is a very good question. I certainly believe that part of the mental health transfer of that $4.5 billion over five years could go toward that kind of education and opportunity because that does put a lot of stress on people, particularly when they cannot communicate. I think the communication part is just as important as providing health workers so that people's particular circumstances can be understood.