Vic Toews

[Terrorism, October 3rd, 2001]

Mr. Speaker, the government is proud of the fact that it fails to find terrorists and leaves the real work to American police agencies. Now the Minister of Justice has refused to ask the supreme court to reconsider its apparent tolerance of foreign terrorists in Canada.

In light of the events of September 11, why has this minister refused to let the court know how its decisions on terrorism could threaten the security of all Canadians?

[National Security, October 2nd, 2001]

Mr. Speaker, Canadians are concerned about terrorists, not legitimate refugee claimants, and the minister has done nothing.

The Minister of Foreign Affairs stated that Canadians must put away their rose coloured glasses when dealing with security matters. After years of ineffective laws and insufficient programming resources, the minister now blames ordinary Canadians.

Instead of blaming everybody else, why will the minister not admit that it is his government's lack of leadership and his government's lack of vision that have created the problem of national security? It has nothing to do with the vision of Canadians.

[National Security, October 2nd, 2001]

Mr. Speaker, on September 21 in Washington the Minister of Foreign Affairs said court decisions based on the charter of rights need to be reviewed because these decisions have contributed to a refugee claimant problem. Those are his words. After years of denial has the minister now changed his government's position?

[Terrorism, October 1st, 2001]

In fact, Mr. Speaker, there is no authority to seize bank accounts. That is what we have been trying to get at and it is what the minister will not admit.

It has been six years since the UN told Canada to implement anti-terrorist legislation. While other countries were leaders in the fight against terrorism, would the minister advise why she failed to bring forward anti-terrorism legislation or why she has failed to seize one thin dime of terrorist assets?

[Terrorism, October 1st, 2001]

Mr. Speaker, last week the Minister of Justice contradicted a finance department official who advised that the government has no legislative authority to seize terrorist bin Laden's assets and bank accounts. The Minister of Justice contradicted the finance official and stated that the government does.

Would the minister admit today that she has no legislation in place to seize the bank accounts of the terrorist bin Laden?

[Agriculture, September 27th, 2001]

Mr. Chairman, I appreciate your patience here tonight and your presence is certainly appreciated.

Although the recent crisis in the United States has overshadowed the more common domestic problems in Canada, we must not forget about the stresses and setbacks of our citizens. The people I would like to talk about today are our Canadian farmers.

Over the past several years it has been clear that the federal government is unwilling or indeed unable to come to grips with a serious farm income problem in Canada. While the federal and provincial ministers recently announced a long term vision for the future of agriculture, this proposal ignored the immediate income crisis facing grain and oilseeds farmers.

While continuing to develop a long term goal for Canadian agriculture is important, more immediate steps need to be taken to ensure that farm families can afford to stay on the farm. Canada needs to develop a plan to put more money into the pockets of farmers immediately. However, instead of implementing practical solutions, the federal government has shown nothing but inaction. Its failure to recognize the grave income problem our farmers face will mean that many families will lose their farms, indeed many corporations who run farms will lose their business.

This is not just a problem in western Canada. This year in particular we have heard how Canadian farmers from coast to coast are suffering severe drought conditions as well as extremely low commodity prices.

If Canadians want to know where the water went, it went to southeastern Manitoba where we have been suffering nothing but flood. Fields are under water and we have serious problems with getting our crops in. We have serious problems with our forage crops and with cattle. In my riding we have had an abundance of water. If there was a way to distribute this water across the prairies or into Ontario, I would love to see that solution. However that is the reality of dealing with weather in Canada.

Speaking specifically of the drought situation, the federal agency that was set up to help farmers and ranchers with their problem with the lack of water, the PFRA ran out of money just four days after the beginning of this fiscal year.

Crops of all kinds have been seriously affected this season. A Statistics Canada survey of 5,900 Saskatchewan farmers suggested that spring wheat production will fall 18% from last year. Canola production will fall 38%. Durum wheat will fall 49% from last year to the lowest level in recent history. Corn production is down 20% and soybean production is down 25%.

Problems like drought cannot always be anticipated or prevented and for that reason it is extremely crucial that government improve upon the existing safety net programs to ensure that they meet the needs of farmers.

Sadly, the federal Liberal government continues to fail Canadian farmers with its lack of an effective agriculture policy. The Canadian wheat farmer receives only 11% of his income from government. Compare that to 58% for European grain farmers and 46% for American farmers. Yet instead of providing direct support for Canadian farmers until we can persuade the Europeans and the Americans to reduce their subsidy levels our minister of agriculture simply shrugs and says, “If you don't like it get out of the business”.

I was very pleased to hear my colleague from Peace River mention the national security aspect of food production because one need only look at history to realize that when we lose control of food production we lose our country. It is an inevitable connection. If we ignore food production here and allow others to produce it, we will lose our country. This is a national security issue that the government simply does not recognize.

Farmers have been ignored and sidelined by the federal Liberal government for years, but our nation rests on the backs of these farmers. Now Canadian farmers are having to face not just what have become the more common problems of debt, drought and flood. They are being hit from all sides by ill-advised government policies. For example, the legislation dealing with cruelty to animals, Bill C-15 currently before the House, has the potential to adversely affect normal farming practices. In the bill we see significant alterations in the underlying principles related to animal offences. It is something that needs to be very carefully considered.

The justice minister has attempted to assure members of the House and the Canadian public that the bill is not intended to target farmers or others who use animals legitimately. She has promised that these changes do not in any way negatively affect the many legitimate activities that involve animals such as hunting, farming, medical or scientific research. I can only ask this question. If it is not intended to change legitimately the way we deal with animals, then why do we need these substantive changes? It is creating anxiety and concerns among farmers.

If the minister were to stand and say that we needed tougher penalties against those who were cruel to animals, I and I think every member of the House would agree with that, but there is something much more behind this legislation. It has nothing to do with more severe penalties. There is an animal rights agenda here that is designed to drive farmers out of business and the Liberal government is buying into the policy. No member across the way will stand up and tell farmers that they will not allow a narrow political agenda to jeopardize the farmers' livelihoods.

The other issue again is ill-advised government policy driven not by members of the House, not the two good Liberal members I see across the way, but by the secret bureaucrats who drive these agendas. Who are they? Who would have advised the minister to introduce this type of legislation? Probably the same bureaucrats or policy advisers who brought in Bill C-68.

What does that have to do with agriculture? It has everything to do with agriculture. It criminalizes activities of hunters and farmers. It is just another government program to worry about; half a billion dollars that it has been dumped down the drain. That half billion dollars could go to our farmers in direct supports. It could go to national security. However, to set up programs to aggravate hunters and farmers and to allow criminals to escape simply is not acceptable.

I have had the opportunity to put a few thoughts on the record. I thank the House for its patience and indulgence.

[Terrorism, September 27th, 2001]

Mr. Speaker, there is nothing about seizing it. Finance department officials are now admitting that they have no record of any of bin Laden's accounts being identified.

Not only has the government failed to enact the appropriate legislation, it has no reporting system in place. How can our allies rely on Canada when the government does not even have simple reporting procedures in place?

[Terrorism, September 27th, 2001]

Mr. Speaker, the Minister of Finance said they waited until the tragedy. Although the United Nations has required action against bin Laden's assets for almost a year, Canada has failed to take any steps to seize his assets. The reason is clear. A finance department official has advised that Canada lacks the appropriate legislation to seize the assets.

Why did the government fail to enact legislation over this past seven months authorizing the seizure of these assets?

[Terrorism, September 26th, 2001]

Mr. Speaker, everyone knows that to implement the international convention on terrorist financing Canada must pass the appropriate law. We have heard now from the Minister of Justice that it does not exist.

Will the Minister of Finance advise us on what Canadian law he was referring to when he told the House that he seized and froze those assets of those terrorists?

[Terrorism, September 26th, 2001]

Mr. Speaker, yesterday the justice minister advised that she was drafting legislation to implement the international convention to suppress terrorist financing while the Minister of Finance advised that he had already legally seized and frozen terrorist assets.

Why does Canada need new laws if our Minister of Finance already has the power to suppress terrorist financing?