House of Commons photoWon his last election, in 2008, with 67% of the vote.
Nisga'A Final Agreement Act December 6th, 1999
moved:
Motion No. 153
That Bill C-9 be amended by adding after line 29 on page 7 the following new clause:
“20.1 Every four years, the Minister of Indian Affairs and Northern Development shall table in each House of Parliament a report on the state of the Nisga'a Final Agreement.”
Agriculture December 3rd, 1999
Mr. Speaker, we will get a real question now. Despite the fact that Canada has taken agriculture subsidies away from our farmers, the government has failed to get any commitment from our trading partners to eliminate their trade distorting policies.
Canadian farmers from every region of the country are under constant threat of illegal trade actions by our closest trading partners. Our producers need quick action by the government to resolve these disputes.
Why does the government not use the same ruthless determination it used when slashing support for our farmers when it is dealing with our trading partners?
Trade December 2nd, 1999
Mr. Speaker, that party's aid package to western Canadian farmers is working so well that its agriculture minister said he would have 100% of the money to Canadian farmers by Christmas, but only 17% of that money has been delivered. Canadian farmers in western Canada are hurting, and they are hurting bad. That kind of answer is irresponsible. Where is the Prime Minister when my question was directed to him?
Other countries have made it crystal clear that they are going to stand for their farmers. Why is our trade minister not doing it for our guys?
Trade December 2nd, 1999
Mr. Speaker, instead of going to bat for our beleaguered Canadian farmers, the international trade minister, to the applause of the Prime Minister, is now spending his time chairing the working group on developing countries. Other countries have made it crystal clear that the reduction of agricultural subsidies is their primary goal and are insisting that they be on the table. Instead of the trade minister spending his time promoting his personal agenda, why is the Prime Minister not insisting that he show some intestinal fortitude and fight for our farmers?
Agriculture December 2nd, 1999
Mr. Speaker, the government has promised over and over that it will make the reduction of international agricultural subsidies a top priority. For six years farmers have been waiting for the government to act and nothing has happened. Even if subsidies are reduced by the WTO, and it is a real possibility that they will not be, it will take years before the result is felt at the family farm.
Time has run out. Farmers need a government prepared for what is happening today, not 10 years from now. The Prime Minister must immediately lead a Team Canada trade mission to the U.S. and European Union to demand an end to their protectionist agricultural policies that are contrary to the letter and spirit of the international free trade agreements and are killing our farmers.
The government is relying on a risky, long term plan with no guarantee of success to address immediate problems and our farmers are paying the price.
The government has let Canadian farmers down far too often. The bleeding must stop before our farmers are bled dry.
Nisga'A Final Agreement Act December 2nd, 1999
moved:
Motion No. 26
That Bill C-9, in the preamble, be amended by replacing lines 21 to 27 on page 1 with the following:
“Whereas the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms applies to the Nisga'a Government in respect of all matters within its authority;”
Agriculture November 30th, 1999
Mr. Speaker, despite Liberal proclamations to the contrary, the crisis in agriculture is growing. Input costs are up, commodity prices are down and unfair international trade actions are increasing.
For over six years the Liberals have promised to negotiate reductions in agricultural subsidies with no result. Even if they are successful, it will take years before the impact is felt at the farm gate. Many producers are on the edge of bankruptcy, not because of poor management, as the Liberal's think, but because of the government's failure to take a strong stand in international trade negotiations.
Canada's trade minister appears more concerned about protecting everything other than farmers against the kinds of trade harassment that threatens millions of dollars in Canadian agricultural production. Where is the long range plan to stabilize farm incomes?
Farmers have suffered long enough because of this government's misguided priorities. They need a government that is prepared for the future instead of one that is mired in the past. How many farmers must go broke before the government wakes up?
Trade November 26th, 1999
Mr. Speaker, despite being vindicated by the U.S. International Trade Commission several weeks ago, Canadian farmers are facing further trade challenges from the United States.
North Dakota is looking to enforce country of origin labelling and is preparing to challenge Canadian durum exports. Our farmers have suffered enough under the government's weak trade position. It is past time to get tough at the trade table.
Will the trade minister guarantee our beleaguered producers that there will be no further border closures? We need positive action and we need it now.
Trade November 19th, 1999
Mr. Speaker, while the minister is paying attention to that he should pay a little more attention in here. The fact is that the cattle industry in Canada spent nearly $5 million in legal fees fighting these complaints by protectionist American producers, money that did not have to be spent if the government had implemented the changes requested by Canadian producers. It could have spent that money on research and promotion.
Why will the agriculture minister not implement the changes recommended by industry, or is he content to do nothing and leave Canadian producers again exposed to these multimillion dollar battles?
Trade November 19th, 1999
Mr. Speaker, Canadian beef producers recently dodged a bullet when the USITC ruled that Canadian cattle exports do not cause injury to the U.S. cattle industry.
In order to avoid further challenges of this type the international definition of dumping must be changed to reflect predatory pricing and selling below home market prices rather than the current definition.
Will the trade minister assure producers that he will immediately renegotiate this definition, or will he continue to leave our producers exposed to the threat of million dollar legal battles?