Rick Casson

[Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy, February 4th, 2004]

Mr. Chair, there is one instance that was brought to my attention. This business has lost equity of $6 million this year. The reference margins that were supplied to him at 70% would return to him $1.4 million through this process. How does that work out when he has lost $6 million and the program will only give him back $1.4 million? This is if he puts up a substantial sum of money in the beginning.

I have a headline from the Lethbridge Herald , “Bankruptcies Soar: Huge increase in numbers from ag related businesses attributed to mad cow disease”.

I also have quotes here from constituents, families that have sent them to me. The first one states, “We are really up against the wall. If we don't receive an answer from you within the next week, I fear we will lose everything”. This is from a family trucking business. Another quote states, “We find ourselves in an increasingly desperate situation. As a small producer we are certainly bearing the brunt of the BSE crisis”. The final one states, “My days in business are numbered. Please, I need your help”.

I just leave that with the minister. These are real people, real families and they are in a real bind. They need some help and they need it now. The program that was put in place, that money went right through their hands and we all talked tonight about where it ended up.

Any program that is designed from here on in has to stop at the producers level so they can get the trucking industry going, so that they can get the welders, the machinists and the mechanics going. It cannot just slip through their hands and everyone lose equity in this business and no one can open their doors in the morning.

[Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy, February 4th, 2004]

Mr. Chair, the hour is late here in the House of Commons, but it certainly is a lot later on many of the farms and in many of the businesses across this country that rely on agriculture for their income.

May 20 and December 23 of 2003 are days many in this country will never forget. These of course are the dates on which two cases of BSE were discovered in North America, one in Canada and one in the United States.

The fact that there is a border between each case is immaterial. Or it should be immaterial. The fact is that the Canada-U.S. border remains closed to trade in live cattle due to politics, not science. All the scientific evidence has proven that beef in North America is safe and the best food safety protocols in the world are in place to ensure that it stays that way.

Why then do we have restrictions that are hampering the free trade of cattle, beef and other ruminant products? We can talk about the poisoned relations between Canada and the United States, a relationship that I personally think needs much repair. We can talk about the abuse of international protocols by many countries, including our own. We can talk about unexplored markets around the world, which would help ease our dependence on the U.S. market. All of these issues are part of the problem. However, what is it that is needed to return a once vibrant growth industry back to its pre-BSE status?

Because this is a take note debate, I want to offer some suggestions to the government to bring this crisis to an end and to end the pain that is being felt in many businesses in Canada, both on and off the farm.

The first is to harmonize the health standards in North America. That includes Canada addressing the fact that we do not allow U.S. feeder cattle into Canada on a year round, untested basis. This of course addresses the issue of bluetongue and anaplasmosis.

The second is to seek agreement from the international community through the OIE to completely exempt cattle 30 months and younger from any negative trade action.

The third is to examine the feed protocols and ensure there is absolute compliance.

The fourth is to establish world confidence in beef from mature animals by targeting any new testing where it will do the most good and in realistic quantities that leave no doubt our process is the safest in the world. This would create demand and give value to our mature animals.

The fifth is to control imports of beef to maximize the use of mature animals from Canadian producers and increase inspections of imported beef to guarantee its quality and to guarantee its origin.

The sixth is to implement the task force that the chairman of the agriculture committee mentioned previously and which was recommended by the Standing Committee on Agriculture and Agri-Food to look into the cattle industry. I suggest that we look at the entire industry, from cow-calf operations to retail sales, to ensure that the industry operates on a fair and equitable basis. This task force could also include in its mandate the issue of slaughter capacity and limited packer options.

The seventh I have mentioned to the minister previously. It is to change the disaster component of the CAISP program to include BSE as a natural disaster. This would give the producers one more level up in the help that they would receive.

But my final offering to this government is to do whatever is necessary to get the border open to trade in live cattle and to start by getting the bureaucrats out of the way. They have done their job. Now they are only hindering the process. I say through you, Mr. Chair, to the minister that if they will not get out of the way, I suggest that he move them out of the way. We have a problem in the bureaucracy in this ministry and it has to change. If they will not go, make them go.

I referenced a letter today from the president of the CFIA to a producer in my riding. Some of the statements in it are absolutely irresponsible. I would also like to mention the comment period that the CFIA has established in dealing with the rules to change the health standards on bluetongue and anaplasmosis. That is a farce. It is a thinly veiled attempt by the CFIA to keep the status quo and keep the border closed to live cattle from the U.S. on a year round basis. That has to change.

[Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy, February 4th, 2004]

Mr. Chair, I will make it very quick. I have two specific questions. One, will the minister include BSE in the definition of natural disaster so that the return on the reference margins will be higher? I think that would be a great move by the government. Also, the other issue is the recognition of the U.S. herd and the health of that herd. Producers heard last week down at the NCBA conference in Phoenix, Arizona that if this government does not allow year round importation of U.S. feeder cattle into Canada, the NCBA will drag its feet and hold up the opening of the border.

[Veterans Affairs, February 4th, 2004]

Mr. Speaker, we have widows' pension issues, we have mustard gas victims, we have pension review appeals piling up, and these are just a few of the issues facing our veterans.

How can the Prime Minister justify three parliamentary secretaries to carry his coat around and not give one to Veterans Affairs?

[Veterans Affairs, February 4th, 2004]

Mr. Speaker, when he appointed his cabinet, the Prime Minister eliminated the position of parliamentary secretary to the Minister of Veterans Affairs. Canadians expect their government to take care of the people who go out and lay their lives down for this country.

With all the issues facing Veterans Affairs, how can the Prime Minister justify this callous slap in the face?

[Petitions, November 5th, 2003]

Mr. Speaker, I have three petitions to present, all of which deal with the same issue. One of them has 48 signatures, another has 150 signatures and the other has 443 signatures. All of them come from the good citizens of southern Alberta.

They petition Parliament to immediately hold a renewed debate on the definition of marriage and to reaffirm as it did in 1999 its commitment to take all necessary steps to preserve marriage as the union of one man and one woman to the exclusion of all others.

[Agriculture, November 3rd, 2003]

Mr. Speaker, if the minister were to talk to producers he would find out that their margins are gone, their equity is gone and their money is gone. They do not have that money.

The agriculture minister has been trying to sell his agriculture policy framework as the answer to everything for the past two years. He knows full well that there are components of the APF that producers find absolutely less than useless. Provinces have not signed on and the program is in now in limbo.

Has the minister consulted the soon to be Liberal leader to see if he supports the APF or will this be one of the programs that he scraps?

[Agriculture, November 3rd, 2003]

Mr. Speaker, the much touted fiscal update delivered today leaves some alarming questions for Canada's agricultural producers.

In his comments, the minister used the BSE crisis as a crutch and an excuse for missing the mark on his budget projections. The only response to the BSE issue from the government was a flawed program that left producers wondering who got the money because they sure did not.

What guarantee can the minister give that the money from the newly proposed program will go directly to producers?

[Ray Speaker, October 22nd, 2003]

Mr. Speaker, on Saturday, October 18 the best university in Canada, the University of Lethbridge, honoured one of our own, bestowing an honorary doctor of laws degree on Ray Speaker.

Born in Enchant, Alberta and raised on the family farm, Ray began his public service career when he was elected to the Alberta legislature for the first time in 1963. In total he was elected as a member of the legislative assembly eight times.

He was elected as a reformer to the House of Commons in 1993, serving as the member of Parliament for Lethbridge until 1997.

In 1999 he was appointed a member of the Privy Council and placed on the Security Intelligence Review Committee. In 2001 he received the Order of Canada.

While enjoying time with his lovely wife Ingrid, their children and grandchildren, Ray continues to work for a better Canada, as we have witnessed in the recent agreement to bring conservatives in Canada together.

So colleagues, next time you see former member of Parliament Ray Speaker, remember that from now on it is Dr. Speaker.

[Agriculture, October 20th, 2003]

Mr. Speaker, the cattle industry and Canadians have been kept in the dark by the government on the issue of BSE and the resulting border closure.

It was confirmed today by the U.S., while we were told a week ago by the U.S. consulate, that in the next few days the U.S. government will publish the rule change that will allow the importation of live cattle under 30 months of age.

Why do the Canadian cattle industry and Canadians continually have to get this critical information from the United States instead of its own government?