Rick Casson

[Agriculture, October 7th, 2004]

Mr. Chair, I rise on a point of order. If the minister agrees to it, could see unanimous consent to extend his question and answer period by 10 minutes.

[Address in Reply, October 5th, 2004]

Mr. Speaker, I would like to congratulate the member opposite on her first day in the House and her first speech.

I also would like to congratulate the member for Davenport. I have had an opportunity to visit the country he mentioned, Portugal, which is almost as beautiful as Canada.

I listened to the member give great praise for the throne speech. I would like to remind her of some things that have taken place in this country in the last number of years, one being that the agricultural community in this country from coast to coast has gone through years of drought and has been left absolutely devastated.

As well, producers have suffered through decades of low commodity prices. The family farm is being eroded and is disappearing. Now we are mired in the worst crisis, arguably, that agriculture in this country has ever faced: the BSE crisis.

As a whole, the agriculture sector in this country lost money last year. When we add up all the revenues and all the problems in agriculture, we get an unbelievable statistic.

The member mentioned her family and people in her constituency, but people in my constituency are losing their livelihood. Some are even threatening to take their own lives because of the desperation the agricultural community is facing.

I have to give credit to the finance minister. In the budget he presented last year, he had at least a half a sentence on agriculture. In the throne speech today, there are only three letters on agriculture. It is unbelievable. I would ask the member to stand up and justify this throne speech when it comes to the agricultural community.

[Supply, May 13th, 2004]

Mr. Speaker, I would like to congratulate the member for Pictou--Antigonish--Guysborough for his presentation, and also for being the deputy leader. He talked about the young people in the country and the bright future we have. I firmly believe that we have a bright future because of people like him.

There are angles of this whole scandal that we do not talk about much, and the member touched upon them briefly. The fact is that it sends a message to all Canadians. I hate to hear when people say that it does not matter who is in government, that they are all crooks. I hear that a lot. It bothers me to no end. Especially when many of us speak to young people in schools and other the opportunities that we have, we start to see that cynicism creep into their thoughts about government. I always leave by encouraging them to vote at every opportunity and at every level they can, that that is what separates this great country from many others.

Part of the whole ad scam issue that is so disturbing is that it has filtered in to all aspects of our society. It is even starting to affect our young people and how they view our government. I would like to give the member an opportunity to expand somewhat on that aspect of the damage from the lack of respect the government has shown for taxpayers and their dollars, and the widespread effect it is having across the country.

[Veterans Affairs, May 11th, 2004]

That is right, Mr. Speaker. They were all sent there to fight for their country, but they are not all getting the opportunity to go back there and be thankful for the fact that they did not die on those beaches.

It is all very well and good, but another day has gone by and now there are only 24 days left before the start of D-Day celebrations in Normandy. The minister, only after coming under severe pressure, has indicated that he is going to send more than the 60 he originally planned to send.

With the days quickly passing by and this government able to toss out billions of dollars in pre-election promises, why can the minister not simply tell us how many more veterans are going to D-Day celebrations? They were sent there to fight for this country 60 years ago. They have the right to go back and--

[Veterans Affairs, May 11th, 2004]

Mr. Speaker, a trip by the Governor General and 59 of her closest friends, $53 million; the ad scam, a national disgrace the Prime Minister is about to bury, $250 million; HRDC mismanagement, $1 billion; and a misguided and useless gun registry, over $1 billion. Sending Canadian D-Day veterans to the 60th anniversary of D-Day should be priceless, but it is obviously not to the government.

Sixty veterans out of a possible 18,000: How can the minister possibly justify this lack of consideration for our veterans?

[Agriculture, May 10th, 2004]

Mr. Speaker, the facts are that due to a lack of direction from this Prime Minister, the beef industry is struggling to deal with wildly changing markets, and also, Canadians working to stay viable are competing for Canadian feeder cattle, not only against other Canadians but also against U.S. producers who are flush with cash. They are in Canada buying our cattle.

Now this government is pitting one sector of the industry against another at a critical time in the process. How does this government expect the latest strategy of confrontation with the packing industry to help get the border open?

[Agriculture, May 10th, 2004]

Mr. Speaker, since the much hailed visit of the Prime Minister and the agriculture minister to Washington, the situation in the cattle industry has become worse. Beef products that were flowing before that meeting with the president have since stopped and will remain stopped until the USDA rule change is implemented.

This step backward and the fact the border remains closed to live cattle clearly indicate the lack of influence the government has when dealing with this file, this crisis. I ask the minister this: What is the next step backward the beef industry can expect from his government?

[Agriculture, May 6th, 2004]

Mr. Speaker, the only science that the government understands is the science of BS. We need some proof on BSE and some action on that.

This concession by the USDA has thrown the cattle industry into further turmoil. Cattle are getting harder and harder to market. The market is dysfunctional. The border has been closed for 350 agonizing days. It has been a month since the USDA comment period closed, yet we see no action.

Nothing has been coming forth from the government. The government is losing this battle on the border front and it is losing the cattle industry in this country. The only answer is an open border. Why is that border not open?

[Agriculture, May 6th, 2004]

Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister and the agriculture minister were in Washington last week for the latest photo op. We heard great promises, but have seen zero action.

The USDA has now joined with a few producers in the U.S. to further restrict the flow of Canadian beef. All we get from the government is one step forward and two steps back.

What action has the Prime Minister taken to counter this latest move by the U.S. to stop our beef from flowing?

[Committees of the House, April 29th, 2004]

Mr. Speaker, it never hurts to try to butter up the referee, whether in a hockey game or in the House of Commons.

I agree with the fact that there is a difference. Members of the cabinet, who do have control of the larger chequebook, need to be watched. They do need to have different regulations from the ones under which we operate, particularly those of us in the opposition. The budgets we control are only our members' operating budgets.

I agree with all the rules, regulations and decisions on what a member of Parliament should make public. We should all have guidelines under which we operate and we should have no problem with that. However I do believe that the real concern is in cabinet and that those recommendations and those comments should come to the House in a public manner and not directly to the Prime Minister.

I wonder if the member would comment a bit further on that aspect.