Pierre Lemieux

[Agriculture and Agri-Food, March 6th, 2014]

Mr. Speaker, once again, I say that the opposition leader is very late to this file. Our government, on the other hand, has been actively engaged with all stakeholders on—

[Agriculture and Agri-Food, March 6th, 2014]

Mr. Speaker, I am glad that the Leader of the Opposition is taking a belated interest in our farmers.

For our government, the economy is our top priority, and certainly the agricultural sector and our grain farmers are a very important part of our economy. Farmers need a reliable, efficient, logistics system. We will be taking action to ensure that system meets their needs.

[Agricultural Growth Act, March 3rd, 2014]

Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank my colleague for the excellent input he provided on the bill.

I read out loud that farmers can save seed. That is in the legislation. However, there will be consultation with industry itself, and regulatory changes to follow, and that is what the minister spoke of.

On the one hand, if all of this were solidified right now with very little consultation, the opposition would say that we did not consult. Instead, we are encasing the farmers' right to save seed within the legislation. The response to the member's question is going to be contained within extensive consultation with industry, and regulatory changes that will follow, through the normal vetting process.

[Agricultural Growth Act, March 3rd, 2014]

Mr. Speaker, the member is caught up in a word when he is not actually reading the text of the bill. I pointed out that proposed section 5.3 very clearly delineates what farmers can and cannot do in terms of saving their seed.

For example, it says:

The rights referred to in paragraphs 5(1)(a) and (b) do not apply to harvested material of the plant variety that is grown by a farmer on the farmer’s holdings and used by the farmer on those holdings for the sole purpose of propagation of the plant variety.

This is very clear. I would ask members of the opposition to actually read the bill and understand what it is saying. There is a lot of support for moving to UPOV '91. We are the last western democracy to take on UPOV '91. Why is the member against it? Why is he concerned about giving our farmers the competitive advantage that UPOV '91 will give them?

[Agricultural Growth Act, March 3rd, 2014]

Mr. Speaker, I thank the Minister of Agriculture for introducing this important bill.

Indeed, this bill on agricultural growth is one of the most important pieces of legislation that our government has introduced in this House. That is why I am pleased to rise today speak to this House.

Our government continues to ensure that Canadian farmers and food manufacturers have the tools they need to spark economic activity and to compete in world markets.

The bill on agricultural growth will modernize and simplify nine pieces of legislation, including seven that the Canadian Food Inspection Agency is responsible for implementing in order to regulate Canada's agricultural sector, and two administered by Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada.

The legislation in question consists of the Plant Breeders’ Rights Act; the Feeds Act; the Fertilizers Act; the Seeds Act; the Health of Animals Act; the Plant Protection Act; the Agriculture and Agri-Food Administrative Monetary Penalties Act; the Agricultural Marketing Programs Act; and the Farm Debt Mediation Act.

Together, these acts and regulations are critical to the strength of our farm gate, the growth of our economy, and the safety of our agricultural products. We can see from the wide spectrum of acts the bill covers that many agricultural stakeholders have been consulted and do support this proposed legislation. These stakeholders represent farmers; seed, feed, and fertilizer companies; retailers; and end-point users. I will give a small sampling in no particular order.

The groups include, Pulse Canada, Canadian Horticultural Council, CropLife Canada, Canadian Agri-Food Trade Alliance, Canadian Federation of Agriculture, Green Growers of Canada, Alberta Barley Commission, Canadian Seed Trade Association, Canadian Private Potato Breeders Network, Barley Council of Canada, Grain Farmers of Ontario, Prairie Oat Growers Association, Western Canadian Wheat Growers, Canterra Seeds, and the list goes on. This list is not exhaustive, but it is illustrative of the support the proposed legislation enjoys within the farming community.

Why take my word for it when we can see what the Liberal opposition critic for agriculture told The Western Producer a mere 10 weeks ago: “...the bill looks very good and there is a lot I can support...”.

I only hope the member keeps his word and supports the bill.

Some of the acts that we are proposing to amend date back to the 1950s. They have served us well, but a lot has changed since those days. As new agricultural production techniques and new developments in science arrive, the legislative tools for agricultural products must keep pace, especially since other international trading partners have innovated and have modernized their approaches.

We need to keep pace with the modern world and help our farmers grow their businesses, and we need to do it now. That is why the agricultural growth act touches on a whole range of areas, from feeds to seeds, to animal health, to plant protection, to farm finance.

The agricultural growth act proposes amendments that would reduce the regulatory burden for industry; promote trade in agricultural products; and strengthen the safety of agricultural products, the first link in the food chain.

I wish to explain how this proposed legislation would go a long way in modernizing the tools and services available to Canadian farmers. What we are proposing to do with this act is to build a more effective, innovative, and nimble legislative framework, one that reflects 21st century realities. Here is an example.

The agricultural growth act would bring plant breeders' rights in line with those of our international competitors. This would ensure that farmers have the latest crop varieties they need to keep pace with their competition. The proposed changes would encourage investment in plant breeding in Canada, thereby increasing the choices Canadian farmers have in accessing high-yielding crop varieties. High productivity in the agricultural sector benefits farmers and grows Canada's economy.

Canada's farmers would still be able to save, clean, treat, and replant a variety of seed on their own land. This is referred to as “farmers' privilege” and is explicitly stated in proposed section 5.3 of the bill.

I wish to point out that the agricultural growth act already reflects extensive stakeholder consultations carried out over the past few years, and that commitment continues.

Any possible regulatory amendments, including farmers' privilege, would of course follow our regulatory processes, would be based on international best practices, and would include extensive consultations with Canadian stakeholders on a crop-by-crop basis.

Here is another example. The agricultural growth act proposes new broader controls on the safety of Canada's agricultural inputs through the licensing and registration of feed and fertilizer manufacturers. To explain further, this act would provide the ability of the Canadian Food Inspection Agency to license or register fertilizer and animal feed operators and facilities that import or sell products across provincial or international boundaries. This would be in addition to the current system, in which feed and fertilizer products are registered product by product.

Licensing and registering facilities and operators would provide a more effective and timely approach to verifying that agriculture products meet Canada's stringent standards. This approach would allow for better tracking and oversight of production processes and the products being produced, a more efficient system for identifying issues early, and a faster response if and when a product recall is required. This would apply to businesses that sell their animal feed and fertilizer products across provincial and international borders and not to farmers who make these products for use on their own farms. This would also align Canadian legislation with international trading partners and would help our feed and fertilizer industries maintain their export markets, especially in the United States.

I have one more example, and it is an important one.

The agricultural growth act will enable us to implement stricter border controls for agricultural products.

I can assure the House that we already take measures to address non-compliance. We can seize illegal products related to feed, livestock, seed and fertilizer. Under the current process, the Canadian Food Inspection Agency attempts to negotiate solutions to problems or initiates court proceedings. The process works, but I will explain why we need to update it.

Illegal products that are seized may include goods that are dangerous or do not comply with packaging and labelling requirements. Right now, Canada sometimes has to pay to dispose of those illegal products. Under the agricultural growth act, CFIA inspectors can order imported feed, livestock, fertilizer and seed out of Canada if they do not meet legal requirements. We already do this for imported plants and animals. This procedure will be similar to how we can order the removal of imported plants and animals if they do not meet legal requirements.

The act also gives CFIA inspectors the power to allow importers to fix the problem in Canada if there is no safety issue and if they can be sure the problem has been corrected. The proposed amendments would provide the CFIA with tools to more effectively fulfill its mandate to protect Canada's plant and animal resources.

Once passed, these changes will help reassure Canadian farmers that imported agricultural products meet our requirements and that they can compete on a level playing field.

What we are doing is bringing the legislation into line with new science and technology, innovation, and international practices in the agricultural sector. We are making Canadian businesses more competitive and ensuring a consistent regulatory approach, and we are harmonizing our legislation with our trading partners.

Just before I sit down, I would like to inform the House that I will be splitting my time with the member for Lambton—Kent—Middlesex.

[Agricultural Growth Act, March 3rd, 2014]

Mr. Speaker, it is clear that this is an important bill for the agricultural sector. It has many positive initiatives within it that will benefit our farmers in many different respects, including their competitiveness.

When I listened to my colleague and a few other speeches in the House on this matter today, it is clear that there are always ideas about changes and other things that could be added, but the member himself has admitted that there are many good things in the bill. It will go before committee. There will be a thorough review of what is in it and the proposals by the opposition on what could be added.

Could the member indicate to the House whether he and his party will be supporting this legislation?

[International Trade, February 28th, 2014]

Mr. Speaker, as I just said, this agreement will bring $1.5 billion a year into Canada's agricultural sector. That is a huge asset for the agricultural sector in Canada, including Quebec.

Canada has been granted unlimited access for all of its dairy products to the European Union, the largest and most lucrative market in the world. By comparison, under the Canada-Europe free trade agreement, the European Union has very limited access to the Canadian market, just 8% of our national consumption of cheese.

[International Trade, February 28th, 2014]

Mr. Speaker, the agreement between Canada and Europe will pump $1.5 billion a year into Canada's agricultural sector and $12 billion a year into Canada's economy.

Our government has always advocated for Canada's supply management system, and we will continue to do so with this agreement. The three pillars of our national supply management system will remain the same.

We will examine any potential effects of this historic agreement on the revenues of dairy farmers, and if the level of protection is negatively affected, we will provide financial assistance.

[Veterans Affairs, February 25th, 2014]

Mr. Speaker, having served 20 years in the Canadian Armed Forces and being a veteran myself, I rise in the House today to highlight what our government is doing to support our veterans.

We have increased funding from $2.8 billion to $3.6 billion in under 10 years. We have cut red tape and have ensured that 90% of Veterans Affairs funding goes directly to programs and services for veterans and their families.

We have made services easier to access through Service Canada offices.

In my riding of Glengarry—Prescott—Russell, in Hawkesbury specifically, veterans will no longer have to travel an hour and a half to Ottawa because they will now have access to a nearby Service Canada office.

Yes, it is clear that our government supports veterans. Canadians have not forgotten what these brave men and women have done to serve our great country, and neither have we.

[The Budget, February 25th, 2014]

Mr. Speaker, it is clear that this government has tremendous respect for our seniors and for the meaningful contributions they have made to Canada.

The minister is absolutely right. This budget contains many very important initiatives to support our seniors. I will list just a few of them. This budget will enhance, by $5 million a year, the new horizons program for seniors. It will expand the targeted initiatives for older workers by investing $75 million to help unemployed older workers put their talents and experience to work. The budget also launches the Canadian employers for caregivers action plan. This would work with employers so that caregivers can maximize their participation in the workforce while being able to provide care for their loved ones.

It is clear this budget supports our seniors, and I thank the minister for the question.