Scott Reid

[Public Safety, October 10th, 2025]

Mr. Speaker, if we install automated external defibrillators, or AEDs, in police cars to be used when the police are the first on the scene in a 911 call for a heart attack, we can save a lot of lives.

Municipal police across Canada have been saving lives with AEDs for years. RCMP officers are already trained on how to use AEDs. Equipping all RCMP vehicles nationwide with AEDs would save upwards of 300 lives per year. Therefore, after 10 years in government, why have the Liberals not installed AEDs in all RCMP cruisers?

[Taxation, October 6th, 2025]

Mr. Speaker, of course my hon. colleague has no specialized expertise in agriculture and is reading prepared remarks, which ignore everything I just said about how Russian supply still comes via the U.S. and an upcharge occurs. North American demand remains the same and prices remain high. This is a completely futile policy.

I want to take a moment, though, to make another point. I am so sick of hearing these self-righteous Liberals talking about what great things they have done for Ukraine and lecturing Conservatives about how we are not supportive of Ukraine.

Shortly after the invasion, my family took in a family of six Ukrainians from Dnipro in the eastern part of the country. They were our friends and stayed with us for a year and a half. On the day I raised my question, we had their nephew and niece staying in my house. I had coffee with them that morning. I would not betray my friends.

I wonder if the member, or any of his colleagues, took in a Ukrainian family. I sincerely doubt it. They are full of hypocrisy. They do not help Ukrainians any more than anybody else, and they should not engage in hollow rhetoric to that effect.

[Taxation, October 6th, 2025]

Mr. Speaker, in the past two weeks, I have twice asked the government why there is still a 35% tariff on Russian fertilizer when it is clear that this is not causing a net decline in Russian exports, nor a fall in the price paid worldwide for Russian product.

The purpose of the tariff, when it was imposed in the spring of 2022, was to punish Russia for the invasion of Ukraine. That year, a total of $115 million in tariff revenue was collected on fertilizer and fertilizer precursors, but because the contracts with Russian suppliers had already been signed and the fertilizer had already been loaded onto ships, the cost ended up being borne not by the Russians but by the Canadian farmers who were on the hook for these purchases. This debacle prompted one contemporary analyst to observe in December 2022, “Sanctions should be punitive. But for tariffs on fertilizers, there was no evidence that Russian companies were affected at all.”

By the start of 2023, Canadian agricultural organizations were calling for the tariff to be lifted, pointing out that Canada was alone among G7 nations in imposing tariffs on Russian fertilizer. I do not see any evidence that our farmers are any less supportive of Ukraine than the rest of Canadians, but I think they wondered, quite reasonably, why in this country, unlike the rest of the world, farmers were being singled out to pay a vastly disproportionate share of the financial burden for supporting Ukraine.

Since 2023, direct Canadian imports of Russian fertilizer and fertilizer precursors like urea have largely dried up, but this has not had the hoped-for effect of driving down the total worldwide demand for Russian urea or monoammonium phosphate. Here is what has happened instead. Canada now imports about 50% of its urea and about 60% to 70% of its monoammonium phosphate from the United States, up significantly from four years ago. In the meantime, the U.S. has increased its own direct imports from Russia, making up the demand shortfall.

A position paper prepared earlier this year by the Grain Farmers of Ontario reports as follows on the implications of what I just described:

Granular, fertilizer grade urea is an indifferentiable commodity, meaning individual tons are very difficult (if not effectively impossible) to trace. The vast majority of US urea exports to Canada enter the country through inland border crossings, but that doesn’t mean the urea received can't be a blend of imported Russian tons with domestically produced American tons.

The report goes on to observe that even when Russian product is not being transited to Canada via the U.S., the need to import from our southern neighbours hurts Canadian farmers and enriches American middlemen without actually reducing the net North American demand for Russian product. It states, “American companies are essentially able to benefit from both sides—importing cheap Russian urea and exporting expensive American urea.” It then says, “the Canadian farmer ends up being the one to foot the bill”.

If the foregoing is correct, why on earth are we retaining the tariff on Russian fertilizer and fertilizer precursors? Surely, Canadian farmers do not need to be further impoverished by a completely ineffective policy that does not make any difference at all to Russia or Ukraine.

[Agriculture and Agri-food, October 3rd, 2025]

Mr. Speaker, last week, I asked why there is still a 35% tariff on Russian fertilizer when it is clear that it is causing neither a net decline in Russian exports nor a fall in the price paid worldwide for Russian product. In Canada, no meaningful displacement of Russian imports with domestic production has taken place, so the result is that eastern Canadian farmers pay more for imports from third countries, creating a shortage in their markets, which is then filled by a full-priced product from Russia.

No other G7 country imposes this burden on its farmers. Why does the Liberal government continue to do so?

[Taxation, September 26th, 2025]

Madam Speaker, in 2022, the Liberals imposed a 35% tariff on Russian fertilizer. By December of that year, Canadian farmers had paid $115 million in tariffs, which the government donated to Ukraine.

In the three subsequent years, the tariff has remained in place, and a further $300 million has been paid to the government by farmers, but the funds are no longer being donated to Ukraine. Because replacements are not available, imports of Russian fertilizer have not gone down.

If the tariff does not actually hurt Russian exports or help Ukraine, why is the government still extracting hundreds of millions of dollars each year from Canadian farmers?

[Questions Passed as Orders for Return, September 15th, 2025]

With regard to expenditures for reestablishing the Correctional Service of Canada’s prison farms at Collins Bay and Joyceville Institutions: (a) since 2015, broken down by fiscal year, what is the total amount, including taxes, paid to (i) Taylor Hazell Architects, (ii) WSP Canada Engineering, (iii) Tacoma Engineers, (iv) Lashley & Associates, (v) Norwell Dairy Systems, (vi) Eastern Crop Doctor, (vii) Advanced Grain Handling Services, (viii) McCann Farm Automation, (ix) Hart Acre Grains, (x) Willows Agriservices, (xi) A et R Boulet, (xii) Chris Rots Enterprises, (xiii) St. Lawrence Veterinary Services, (xiv) Colliers Project Leaders, (xv) Pen Farm Herd Co-Op, (xvi) Dairy Farmers of Ontario, (xvii) Strong Bros Construction; (b) since 2015, broken down by fiscal year, what is the total amount, including taxes, spent on (i) veterinary services, (ii) project management services, (iii) construction site security services, (iv) pesticide application services, (v) fertilizer application services, (vi) combining and trucking services, (vii) silage services, (viii) procurement services, (ix) engineering and architectural design services, (x) translation services, (xi) legal services; (c) since 2018, what is the total number of beehives purchased, the total amount spent on beehives, and the current number of beehives at each site; (d) of the total number of beehives purchased in (c), how many beehives were purchased from Correctional Service Canada and CORCAN employees, and at what cost; (e) since 2018, what is the total number of beef cattle purchased, the total amount spent on beef cattle, and the current number of beef cattle at each site; (f) since 2018, what is the total number of dairy cattle purchased, the total amount spent on dairy cattle, and the current number of dairy cattle at each site; (g) of the total number of dairy cattle purchased in (f), how many cattle were purchased from members of Correctional Service Canada’s Prison Farm Advisory Panel and the Pen Farm Herd Co-Op, and at what cost; (h) since 2018, broken down by fiscal year, what is the total amount, including taxes, spent on (i) farm staff salaries and benefits, (ii) offender pay for farm work, (iii) farm equipment, (iv) demolitions and renovations at Collins Bay Institution, (v) demolitions and renovations at Joyceville Institution, (vi) new construction at Collins Bay Institution, (vii) new construction at Joyceville Institution excluding the dairy cattle barn; (i) what is the total amount, including taxes, spent on the dairy cattle barn at Joyceville Institution, including construction, modifications, procurement fees, consultancy fees (design, engineering, geotechnical, environmental, topographic, etc.), travel and meals, contingencies, project management, contract administration, and dairy equipment and technology for the cow barn; (j) on what date was final completion of the dairy cattle barn achieved and on what date was the barn handed over to Correctional Service Canada by the contractor; (k) since 2024, broken down by month, what have been the costs of operating the dairy cow barn, including staff salaries, veterinary care, feed and bedding, waste management, transportation, utilities, maintenance, internet fees, licensing, inspections, security and supervision; (l) since 2024, broken down by month, what have been the total revenues from the sale of milk; (m) since 2018, broken down by fiscal year, what have been the total revenues from the CORCAN Agribusiness business line, other than milk, broken down by the sale of (i) beef cattle, (ii) dairy cattle, (iii) crops, (iv) honey, (v) other (please identify); (n) since 2018, what is the total amount spent on offender vocational certifications directly related to the prison farm program; and (o) since 2015, including but not limited to all expenses identified in (a) to (n), what is the total amount spent to date on all aspects of reestablishing the penitentiary agriculture program, including planning, consultations, implementation, construction, operations, consultancy, procurement, inspections, assessments, regulatory fees and legal services?

[Questions Passed as Orders for Return, September 15th, 2025]

With regard to CORCAN agriculture and agribusiness spending since fiscal year 2015-16: (a) what is the total amount of operational spending related to CORCAN agriculture and agribusiness, broken down by fiscal year; (b) what is the total amount of capital spending related to CORCAN agriculture and agribusiness, broken down by fiscal year; (c) what is the total amount of revenue related to CORCAN agriculture and agribusiness, broken down by fiscal year; (d) what is the total amount of operational spending related to CORCAN penitentiary farms, broken down by fiscal year; (e) what is the total amount of capital spending related to CORCAN penitentiary farms, broken down by fiscal year; (f) what is the total amount of revenue related to CORCAN penitentiary farms, broken down by fiscal year; (g) what is the total amount of operational spending related to CORCAN penitentiary farms, broken down by fiscal year and institution; (h) what is the total amount of capital spending related to CORCAN penitentiary farms, broken down by fiscal year and institution; and (i) what is the total amount of revenue related to CORCAN penitentiary farms, broken down by fiscal year and institution?

[Questions on the Order Paper, September 15th, 2025]

With regard to Parks Canada land currently under lease to the municipality of Smiths Falls, Ontario: (a) does an archaeological assessment already exist for the leased Parks Canada lands adjacent to the Rideau Canal within the Smiths Falls municipal boundary, and, if so, can the assessment be shared with the municipality, in its capacity as a leaseholder; (b) what triggers the requirement for an archaeological assessment, including for low-impact projects, including, but not limited to, pathway installation and landscaping; (c) who determines the scope of an archaeological assessment; (d) is the municipality, in general or in its capacity as a leaseholder, responsible for conducting and funding this work; (e) what are the review timelines and implications if archaeological resources are identified; (f) what federal policies govern the use, enhancement or activation of Parks Canada lands under lease to municipalities; (g) what types of improvements are permitted on Parks Canada lands under lease to municipalities, including, but not limited to, permanent structures, landscape enhancements and events; and (h) who within Parks Canada holds the final decision-making authority for development proposals on leased lands?

[Questions on the Order Paper, September 15th, 2025]

With regard to the Impact Assessment Agency of Canada: for each of the president and vice-presidents, what are the details of all travel claim expenses in each instance of travel for which airfare expenses were greater than $0, incurred in each of 2022, 2023, 2024 and 2025, including, for each instance of applicable travel, (i) the travel start date, (ii) the travel end date, (iii) the total travel expense amount, (iv) the origin city, (v) the destination city, (vi) any cities or locations travelled to, other than the origin or destination cities, for which any expenses were claimed, including dates, times, and transportation method, (vii) the purpose of travel to each location, including the name, itinerary, and duration dates of any events, conferences, or other official gatherings attended, (viii) the dates, times, locations, purposes, and attendees for each meeting attended during travel, (ix) the total days of per diems claimed, (x) the daily per diem rate, (xi) the total amount of per diems claimed, (xii) the date, type, purpose, and amount spent on ground transportation, per use, (xiii) the location, per-night rate, and amount spent on accommodations, per night, (xiv) the daily itinerary items for each day of travel for which per diems were claimed?

[Finance, June 20th, 2025]

Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister is a broken record of broken promises, and the list keeps on growing. There are broken promises on spending, and we still do not have a budget plan. There are broken promises on consultants and on consulting with Canadians. There are broken promises to have his elbows up with the Americans. Instead, what the Prime Minister has lifted is his middle finger to Canadians on affordability, inflation and Liberal policies.

Canadians need real change from the Prime Minister, not pocket change in tax cuts, not broken promises and not false hopes. Will the Prime Minister table a real budget plan this spring or will he not?