Wayne Stetski

[Budget Implementation Act, 2018, No. 1, April 16th, 2018]

Mr. Speaker, I met with a number of small businesses in my riding during the furor, I guess would be the best way to describe it, on the original Liberal government proposals. Absolutely we need to do better for small businesses. For example, I would like to see a limit to the credit card charges our businesses pay.

I am going to read the title of the budget to make sure I get it right. The Liberals claim that it is a gender and growth budget. I want to be a little more specific than my colleague across the floor. Would the Conservatives agree that we need pay equity now?

[Fisheries Act, March 29th, 2018]

Mr. Speaker, in 2015, one of the reasons my riding of Kootenay—Columbia changed hands from being Conservative for 21 years to NDP was the Conservatives' attack on the environment, including removing the habitat section from the Fisheries Act.

I was a regional manager with the Ministry of Environment for southeastern B.C. for a number of years and we worked very closely with the federal fisheries department. I can tell the member that literally hundreds and thousands of actions by the federal department across Canada helped to protect fish habitat and fish.

I know that my colleagues in the Conservative Party like to talk about a ditch in Abbotsford and the flood in Manitoba. Absolutely, I think the officers who acted in those particular circumstances were not using their best discretion. However, would the member not agree that thousands of actions that protect habitat really should be the primary focus rather than the handful of perhaps poor decisions made by individual officers?

[Families of Members of Parliament, March 29th, 2018]

Two months ago, a reporter from The Hill Times stopped me outside the House of Commons and asked a question. She said, “Prince Harry and Meghan Markle are getting married. Do you have any advice for them?” I said,“Yes. Learn to cut each other some slack.” “Is that what you do for your wife”, she asked. I said, “No. Just the opposite. I would not be here if she didn't cut me an incredible amount of slack.”

Being in Ottawa six months of the year and away from home much of the time when we are in our ridings requires incredible sacrifices by our families. We miss special occasions, day-to-day household crises, conversations, and hugs, to name just a few. We do it because we all want a better Canada and we all want to serve our constituents well. However, it does come with a personal cost.

Therefore, I thank my family, Audrey, Shawn, Kellie, Adrian and Lalita, for its love and support. I would also like to thank the families of all members for cutting their favourite MPs a lot of slack and for sharing them with us, with their constituents, and with all of Canada. It is very much appreciated.

[Health, March 1st, 2018]

Mr. Speaker, when the parliamentary secretary says there is no political interference, sometimes by setting guidelines that will not work for small growers or outdoor growers, we are in essence providing political interference through a set of standards.

In terms of measuring what is in the crop, that is easily handled afterward before it goes to market. The potency can be checked absolutely after a crop is grown and before it is sold on a commercial basis.

I still am concerned. Of the 200 licences, I am wondering if the member knows how many are actually from small, rural farmers or growers and what the government intends to do to make sure there is still a future for these small, rural outdoor farmers who want to be a legal part of the future recreational use of marijuana.

[Health, March 1st, 2018]

Mr. Speaker, last November I asked the government what it would do to support the small-scale outdoor farmers who are producing cannabis for recreational use.

Increasingly we see large corporations quickly taking the lead in getting licences to produce marijuana, companies like Tweed Main Street, founded by Liberal Party CFO Chuck Rifici; National Green BioMed, whose chairman is former Liberal cabinet minister Herb Dhaliwal; and Hydropothecary Corporation, whose VP used to be the Liberal health minister in B.C. They are all quickly expanding to meet the government's timetable. At the same time, new producers and small producers, like people in my riding, are being locked out.

Last week I met with Lesli-Ann Lancaster, the owner of Kootenay Marijuana Company, a new company in my riding of Kootenay—Columbia, who wants to produce marijuana for medicinal and recreational use. Lesli-Ann wants to run a legal, above-board company and is trying to raise the capital required for the licensing process.

The licensing process is lengthy and expensive and requires that the facility be developed as the licensing progresses. This means that companies need to have their capital in place before they can become fully licensed. Lesli-Ann went to the Bank of Montreal to open an account so she could start raising the capital needed for the licensing and development process. Guess what? The bank informed her, and I quote, “We need an approval from Health Canada before we can set up an account. I'm aware that you can't get the approval yet due to Health Canada's capital constraints, and this really puts you between a rock and a hard place.”

Let us go over that again. Lesli-Ann cannot get a licence because she does not have enough capital, and she cannot raise capital until she has a licence. That is pretty much the classic definition of a catch-22. I should mention that Lesli-Ann is a business consultant and bookkeeper and counts a number of potential marijuana farmers among her clients. She told me that many of them are enduring similar frustrations.

At the same time Lesli-Ann is struggling to overcome seemingly impossible federal government restrictions, a number of small marijuana growers in my riding of Kootenay—Columbia have banded together to form a co-op. They wrote me this week asking that I share their concerns with the Prime Minister. Their concern is that new licences will not be available until Canada's legalization becomes law. However, outdoor producers will miss the May 1 planting deadline and will not have any product for sale until November 2019, a full 16 months after legalization.

It is uncertain if the government will even license the outdoor production of cannabis. This government talks about the importance of legal production, but it is doing everything possible to prevent small rural producers from working within the law. These are businesses that want to operate within the law. They want full accountability, appropriate licensing, and to be part of Canada's new legal marijuana regime. However, they are being prevented at every turn while big pot corners the market. This is truly an example of the inequality that is pervasive in Canada. The wealthy get richer; working class people and small businesses get left behind.

When will the government take action to help small marijuana farms and outdoor growers instead of continuing to push them back into the shadows? They are not going away, and neither am I.

[Committees of the House, March 1st, 2018]

Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank the member for York—Simcoe for introducing this private member's bill.

Canadians take great pride in their built heritage, as they do in their diverse culture and history. Bill C-323 would provide Canadians with a much needed tax credit to assist them in repairing and maintaining heritage buildings. I have spoken with many constituents in my riding of Kootenay—Columbia, and the bill is very welcomed there. We have many heritage homes and other buildings, and repairing them can be very expensive.

Recently, I had the privilege of sitting on the Standing Committee on Environment and Sustainable Development while we studied this bill. At the same time, the committee also looked at the state of federal funding and management of national heritage. Along with other members of the committee, I learned a great deal. I learned that between 2003 and 2006, the federal government offered financial incentives for the restoration of commercial buildings.

Over three years, the commercial heritage properties incentive fund contributed $15 million for this purpose. The economic impact of the fund was $143.4 million in restoration work, a sound investment, and in fact, almost a ten to one return on government investment. While the committee examined many heritage concerns, I will focus on the testimony and recommendations about built heritage because they speak directly to the issues we are considering here with Bill C-323.

The committee heard from Ms. Natalie Bull, executive director of the National Trust for Canada. Ms. Bull said:

Why would a parliamentary committee be concerned with the state of historic places in Canada? I think there are lots of great reasons. For a start, there is the potential for positive impacts on climate change. Canada's buildings are the third-largest greenhouse gas emitting sector, and the reuse and renewal of heritage buildings capitalizes on materials and energy already invested, reduces construction and demolition waste, and avoids the environmental impact associated with new development.

In addition to climate change benefits, historic places can contribute to a strong economy. Rehabilitation projects generate up to 21% more jobs than the same investment in new construction. They're a great stimulus measure, and they typically use local labour and materials, such that 75% of the economic benefits of heritage rehabilitation projects tend to remain in the communities where these buildings are located.

More jobs, action on climate change, and reduced waste all seem like excellent reasons to support Bill C-323. It would have been great for the government to have included funding for this in its budget released earlier this week.

Personally, I was very disappointed that there was no money in the government's 2018-2019 budget to fund a national home energy retrofit program across Canada for homes in general and nothing for heritage homes either.

Mr. Chris Wiebe, the manager of heritage policy and government relations at the National Trust, reiterated the organization's support for this legislation. He said:

First, we would recommend implementation of a federal heritage rehabilitation tax incentive, such as the measures recently proposed in Bill C-323. That is a proven way to attract private and corporate investment to privately owned historic places and to give them vibrant new uses. Two, the government could consider extending a rehabilitation tax credit to heritage homeowners to get even more impact. Three, federal investment in seed funding for creative financing mechanisms like crowdfunding could help many more charities and not-for-profits attract private donations and would save and renew some of the thousands of other heritage buildings that make up the fabric of our communities. Finally, an increase in federal cost-shared funding available for the national historic sites heritage places program would help turn the tide of neglect for these important national icons as well.

While Bill C-323 would not answer all of these questions, it would be a good start toward supporting Canadian heritage. In fact, when the environment and sustainable development committee, which I sat on, made its recommendations to the House of Commons on these matters, it spoke directly to the need for a tax credit. The committee tabled its 10th report entitled “Preserving Canada's Heritage: the Foundation for Tomorrow”, in December 2017, just two short months ago. Recommendation no. 11 of that report said:

The Committee recommends that the federal government establish a tax credit for the restoration and preservation of buildings listed on the Canadian Register of Historic Places.

That would appear to be a slam dunk for Bill C-323. The committee recommends a tax credit for heritage building restoration and preservation. A bill comes before the committee that does exactly that, yet the Liberals on the committee went against their own recommendations and voted to kill the legislation. They forced through a report that recommended that the House stop dealing with Bill C-323. If those members of Parliament received anywhere near as much correspondence supporting the bill as I did, I have to say that their constituents will be very disappointed. Still, we have a chance to pass the proposed legislation at third reading, and I call upon all members of the House to support it.

Members may be interested in knowing what else the committee recommended on the issue of built heritage. Recommendation 12 of the report says:

The Committee recommends that the federal government, in co-operation with provincial and territorial governments, work to adapt future versions of Canada’s National Model Building Codes in a manner that will facilitate the restoration and the rehabilitation of existing buildings and the preservation of their heritage characteristics.

This is important, because old buildings do not easily adapt to new building codes. One example, given by Mr. Robert Eisenberg at York Heritage Properties, is that adding insulation to the roofs of older buildings increases snow load in the winter because heat no longer escapes through the roof to melt the snow, thus threatening the building's structural integrity.

The committee spent time looking at issues specific to rural areas, like my riding of Kootenay—Columbia, resulting in recommendation 13, which reads:

The Committee recommends that Parks Canada review its National Cost-Sharing Program and, if it is determined that rural sites are under-represented in applications for funding or in the awarding of funding, steps should be taken to improve the program.

Rural areas have specific struggles when it comes to preserving heritage buildings. In particular, there is sometimes a lack of specialized craftspeople and specialty materials available locally, and the cost to bring them in from bigger cities is prohibitive. That is why heritage buildings in many rural areas are left to fall into neglect. I am very fortunate in my riding of Kootenay—Columbia to have a number of very skilled tradespeople who are ready, willing, and able to rehabilitate heritage homes.

While recommendation 13 did not address the need for a tax credit directly, it is clear that the passage of Bill C-323 would be particularly valuable in rural areas like mine. Finally, heritage building owners would be able to afford the additional expenses required to restore these important buildings.

I wish to finish my remarks today by reading from a January 2017 letter I received from the City of Nelson that asked me to support Bill C-323. The City of Nelson said that these tax measures could transform the economic fundamentals for renewing historic places and encourage building conservation of every size and type, from landmark commercial buildings to modest homes.

I agree and that is why we will be voting in support of Bill C-323.

[Business of Supply, February 15th, 2018]

Mr. Speaker, last June I had the pleasure of accompanying the veterans affairs committee on a trip to Washington to look at how the United States treats veterans versus how Canada treats veterans. There is a very alarming statistic. They now estimate that something like 70% of returning armed forces personnel suffer from PTSD. A couple of days ago, I met with Trevor Sanderson and Dick Groot, who are camping out here in Ottawa's winter at the veterans memorial. I had an interesting conversation with them about the impacts of PTSD and transition.

I would really like to know what the government intends to do to improve services, both around PTSD for our returning veterans and also around transition.

[Clayton Murrell and Joan MacKinnon, February 15th, 2018]

Mr. Speaker, sometimes life just is not fair.

On February 3, a tractor trailer lost control on Highway 3 in my riding of Kootenay—Columbia and ran head-on into a truck, resulting in the deaths of Clayton Murrell and Joan MacKinnon. This tragedy has left their families, friends, co-workers, and the people of Cranbrook with a deep sense of loss. Memorials in front of the fire hall and community pool are testaments to how much they were loved.

Clay was a fire department captain and was well known for his kindness, his constant teasing, and for always asking, “What is the right thing to do?”

Joan was an aquatic supervisor with the Leisure Services Department, training hundreds of lifeguards. Her dedication was recognized with the Life Saving Society’s Outstanding Achievement Award. Her staff speak of Joan's caring and grace, and her mantra, “Let it go”.

With Joan and Clay's passing, heaven received two beautiful souls. We wish them much love, everlasting peace, and an endless trail ride.

Sometimes life just is not fair.

[Canadian Heritage, February 14th, 2018]

Mr. Speaker, this year marks 80 years since Gatineau Park was established, and for nearly 50 years the Canadian Parks and Wilderness Society has been striving for its protection. Gatineau Park is a cherished resource within our national capital region, and home to 118 rare or endangered species, but despite its importance, there are no restrictions on development and no set borders for the park.

Will the Prime Minister and the Minister of Canadian Heritage accept CPAWS' request and amend the National Capital Act to protect the ecological integrity of Gatineau Park and establish its boundaries in law?

[Fisheries Act, February 13th, 2018]

Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank my colleague across the floor for her work on this, and for bringing in both Bill C-68 and Bill C-69.

My riding of Kootenay—Columbia was Conservative for 21 years. Quite frankly, it was the Conservative government's attack on environmental legislation, including the Fisheries Act, Navigable Waters Act, and the Environmental Assessment Act, that led to the change in my riding of Kootenay—Columbia.

I was a regional manager with Fish and Wildlife for southeastern B.C. from 2002 to 2009. At the time, there was a DFO office in the Kootenays that had four staff working in it. They showed me a staffing chart. They were supposed to go to 12 staff, but by the time 2015 came along, there was not one DFO staff left in the Kootenays.

Would the member support re-establishing a DFO office in Kootenay—Columbia in the southeastern part of B.C.?