Wayne Easter

[Agriculture, February 10th, 2005]

Mr. Speaker, the minister and his delegation certainly should be congratulated for their trip to Washington and for their efforts to get the border open.

We are very pleased that Secretary Johanns is committed to the March 7 opening for live cattle under 30 months. We are also pleased that he is still committed to working toward a full resumption of trade.

We as a government will continue to press aggressively in that matter for full resumption of beef trade--

[Agriculture, February 9th, 2005]

Mr. Speaker, the Minister of Agriculture is always interested in positive change for the industry and moving it forward. If we are to continue programming for the industry, we need to work with the industry in terms of how it wants to move forward. That is exactly what the minister is doing in this regard.

[Supply, February 3rd, 2005]

Madam Speaker, I want to come back to the question that the minister asked the member earlier. I believe it was a low blow for the member opposite to say that the minister did not want to go to the UPA convention. There was an emergency debate on agriculture that day in the House and that is why the minister stayed. He stayed to debate the issue in an important way about policy that could benefit all agriculture producers in Canada.

The member opposite did not answer the minister's question on two points. One was on the assistance to BSE and whether it helped producers in Quebec. I know members of the separatist party find it difficult to admit that Canadian programs benefit their producers, and they do.

The second question related to dairy, which was as a result of the request from Quebec producers and other dairy producers in Canada. They asked that we try to bring into the formula, through the Canadian Dairy Commission, some compensation for the lower returns for cull cow prices and so on to the dairy industry.

Yes, there is more we can do, we know that, but will the member admit that those programs have been of benefit to Quebec producers?

[Supply, February 3rd, 2005]

Madam Speaker, I rise on a point of order. Discussions have taken place between all parties and I believe that you will find consent for the following order:

That at the conclusion of today's debate on the opposition day motion, all questions necessary to dispose of the main motion be deemed put, a recorded division deemed requested and deferred to Tuesday, February 8, 2005 at 5:30 p.m.

[Supply, February 3rd, 2005]

Madam Speaker, as I said, the CAIS deposit is being looked at. It is a safety net. What do the members on the other side propose to deal with the real problem which is income from the marketplace to producers? We are working with industry to try to find solutions. What are they proposing?

[Supply, February 3rd, 2005]

Madam Speaker, I listened intently for solutions from the member opposite but I never heard them.

I stand here absolutely amazed at the gall of the opposition in terms of how it tries to play political games with farmers' lives. That is basically what it is trying to do. If anything, it should be recognizing that the minister has not tried to put a spin on the numbers. He has admitted that there is a problem in terms of agriculture.

In terms of the returns from the marketplace, I would agree with the hon. member on the point that returns from the marketplace to primary producers are in the negative area but they have been declining for 25 years.

In terms of the safety net program, the minister asked his provincial colleagues in July to look at the issue to see what options were available in terms of CAIS. The opposition members can play all the games they want but in this country we operate under federal-provincial agreements. They should stand and admit that it requires a change in the federal-provincial agreements instead of misleading the farm community and saying that the minister on his own can change it, when he cannot. They know differently.

Let me make another point. The member opposite talked about subsidies in other areas actually improving farm incomes. The fact is that farm incomes are going down around the world. A good marketing institution that maximizes returns to primary producers is the Canadian Wheat Board. It has been proven as such, but the Conservative Party wants to do away with it. It consistently attacks supply management, which has been a marketing institution that challenges the marketplace in the interest of primary producers.

Yes, the government is looking at the CAIS program, which the minister initiated in July, but it has to work at it federally and provincially. What is that party really saying in terms of dealing with--

[Canada Elections Act, February 1st, 2005]

Mr. Speaker, as usual we get a rant with no substance from the member opposite. He said that the CFIA is out of control. Nothing is further from the truth. The government itself has responded progressively with the minister's September 10 announcement. In support of the current government's measures, CFIA has decentralized its plant approval process that will see a regional team of experts fully dedicated to new plant approvals. The member knows this, but he just does not want to admit it.

I have seen that in my province of Prince Edward Island with the plant that has just opened. We saw it with the plant that the member mentioned in Blue Mountain. That is working with the operators in a regional--

[Canada Elections Act, February 1st, 2005]

Mr. Speaker, the member said that he did not get an answer on November 5. I just re-read Hansard and I think he received a very positive answer. In fact, I answered the question myself. I told him that I had talked to individual investors at the plants and that we would be moving ahead. He admits himself, and he says that lo and behold something was done.

Of course something was done. The minister announced on September 10 a policy and a program to increase beef slaughter capacity in the country, and we have been moving ahead doing that.

Regarding the question of how many plants have been approved in the last 18 months in western Canada, CFIA cannot approve plants unless investors have put in place an operation and want the federal inspection system.

I would answer this way. In the last 18 months the CFIA has had one request in western Canada for the registration of a beef slaughter house. Officials of the Canadian Food Inspection Agency worked very closely, and he admitted that himself, with the management of the establishment to facilitate the plant's registration.

On November 9, 2004, the CFIA informed the minister that the application for registration for the establishment was approved and that the plant was licensed and was eligible to begin operations as of November 10, 2004. While the details of the plant's application process cannot be discussed, it is important to note that all new meat establishments must provide the required information so that their application for registration can be properly evaluated by the CFIA for compliance with health and safety standards and requirements of our trading partner.

Currently for beef, there are 29 federally registered licensed slaughter house operations across Canada. One other plant has officially approached the CFIA for federal registration and that file is progressing quite well. We expect to see more requests. In fact, we hope to see more requests, and the CFIA is prepare to do its part as is the minister.

The requirements for federally registered meat establishments are fundamental to Canada's meat inspection program which is designed to ensure that Canadian meat products achieve the highest standards for food safety. These federal standards also allow Canadian meat products to be exported to markets around the world. Requirements vary significantly from country to country, and we are audited by foreign countries to ensure that requirements are met.

In conclusion, the CFIA has in place a well established and recognized process for application review. When the necessary information is returned from the plant ownership, an immediate review and evaluation occurs. That is what the CFIA is all about, to help those plants get registered, to see that our standards are met and to ensure that we are moving product that is safe for the consuming population and meets the requirements of the nations that we export to as well.

[Finance, January 31st, 2005]

We already had the largest tax cuts in history. We are delivering the largest tax cuts in history.

[Budget Implementation Act, 2004, No. 2, December 14th, 2004]

Mr. Speaker, on a point of order, the member used the figure of $2 billion and he knows it is $1.1 billion.