44th Parl. 1st Sess.
April 17, 2023 11:00AM
Madam Speaker, the Bloc Québécois is clearly in favour of establishing a food day. It was a pleasure to address this in committee, and it passed within minutes. It is not controversial.
The bill states that “Canada’s national sovereignty is dependent on the safety and security of our food supply”, that it “contributes to our nation’s social, environmental and economic well-being”, that it is important to support local farmers and that local foods need to be celebrated. All that is wonderful.
Unfortunately, I will be a bit of a killjoy this morning, because it is just lip service. Yes, we will vote in favour of the bill because it is important to establish this day. I think that we will be able to use it as a springboard for future initiatives; however, in reality, our agricultural industry is currently suffering. In response to the significant inflationary pressure, the Union des producteurs in Quebec and the Canadian Federation of Agriculture sent out messages and letters and expressly asked for meetings. Their requests were very, very reasonable and based on facts and data. They even made pre-budget requests, because they know how things work. They know when they need to do this.
There was very little in the budget; next to nothing, in fact. There was some clarification about Bill C-208 on farm succession after more than a year of waiting and more than a year of frozen transactions, especially in Quebec. That takes time. That was positive, but as for the rest, all we got were vague figures and the continuation of existing programs that barely work or are not working at all. I will provide some statistics. The people at UPA explained it for us.
The cost of inputs has risen by 43.3% overall, but in agriculture, it is up 69%. Inflation has risen by 55.4% on average, but in agriculture, it is up 64%. That refers to the cost of everything required to produce food. The increase in interest rates and the cost of debt servicing comes to 36.9% overall, but 58.5% in agriculture, because farms have a high debt load. As the previous speaker mentioned, gone are the days of pitchforks; Technologies have evolved and farmers now need tractors, which are expensive. We see farmers working in their fields and we think they are doing fine, but they still have not paid off their equipment. These producers are going into debt to feed us. I really want people to start understanding that, believing it and taking appropriate action.
The costs do not stop there. Transportation costs have risen by 33% in other sectors, but 49.9% in agriculture. Insurance costs have increased by 31.7% overall, but 49.6 % in agriculture. The list goes on. Things have reached a point where two out of 10 farm businesses are now in poor or very poor financial shape. We are talking about 20% of farms. Five out of 10 farm businesses expect their financial situation to deteriorate in the next twelve months. Three out of 10 businesses have a negative residual balance. Things are not going well. Four out of 10 farm businesses report that rising interest rates could prevent them from meeting their financial obligations. For some, this will mean shutting down. More than six out of 10 businesses plan to reduce or delay investments because they are straining just to keep up with their payments. In this kind of situation, investing is out of the question. The government wants these businesses to invest money and says it will help them, but they are tapped out. To grasp the reality of this situation, we have to see what is happening on the ground.
A total of 18% of businesses are considering asking their financial institution for a capital holiday. Do members understand what it means to request a capital holiday from a financial institution? It means that things are going so badly for the business that it will only pay the interest on its loans. What a great future for agricultural production. I think that, as a federal government, we have a role to play in that. I think that we could meet the needs and boost cash flow. What is more, 14% of farms plan to reduce the size of their business because they cannot deliver. Here is the most troubling statistic: 11% of farms plan to cease operations or close their doors. That is more than one in 10 farms.
We are mainly talking here about young farmers, the ones we talk about with a tear in our eye, while saying they are so great and wonderful. Perhaps it is time for us to show them how great and wonderful they really are by helping them. Farming is an ongoing, daily struggle, and we, as elected officials, need to have the utmost respect for these people who work seven days a week.
Given the current shortage of workers in almost every sector, let us survey agricultural businesses to find out who is interested in taking over the farm, in working seven days a week, 12 months a year. Let us find out who is interested in living in uncertainty with little support from governments and in being forced to compete with foreign products that do not meet the same standards.
I do not know how many times we have talked about reciprocity of standards. I want to give a shout-out to my colleague from Beauce, who is leading this fight with me at the Standing Committee on Agriculture and Agri-Food. He often raises this issue. Something needs to be done. We cannot ask our farmers to meet very strict standards yet also let in junk. When they talk about increasing the level of glyphosate in food—like they did last year—when none of our local farmers asked for it, they are sending a very clear message, namely that we will adapt to international standards. That way, people can bring in stock subject to more standards than our farmers' products. Can we be serious for 30 seconds, impose the same requirements and support our people?
Chicken farmers have created a DNA test. It has been around for years, it works and it is ready to go. Why is it not in place yet? The DNA test determines whether the poultry coming in is spent fowl or fresh chicken. There is cheating in international trade. Trade is wonderful; we all need to trade, but that has to be a rigorous process.
We must not forget the most important part. There have been plenty of positive speeches and gestures here in the House of Commons, including overwhelming support from 293 members who voted in favour of the bill to protect supply management in future trade agreements. That is significant. All political parties and the vast majority of MPs supported it. Only 23 people opposed it. However, now the bill is stuck in committee. There is an obvious intent to hijack the bill, and some members are filibustering. They keep talking to kill time. Everyone's time is being wasted.
I would also point out that this is coming from a political party that is always talking about government spending. They have good reason to talk about government spending, but it is important to stop and think for a second about what it costs to have a committee meeting where the same person talks for two hours, delaying a crucial bill that we passed in 2021 but had to start over again because an election was called. Although some progress has been made and we are at roughly the same stage, the bill is currently stuck.
I do not really want to hear anyone say that the bill is going to pass anyway. Are we serious about supporting our producers? Our producers are watching us and watching the public committee meetings. They are not happy. They want transparency and honesty when it comes to support, and they want concrete action. My colleagues know that it is important to be self-sufficient in terms of food security. I talk a lot about food resilience, food sovereignty. It really is important.
In closing, I would like to remind all my colleagues how much this reality hit home during the pandemic. This is a very serious issue. It is not just unpleasant for key sectors to be reliant on outside sources, it is actually very bad. I am talking about medical equipment, masks, ventilators. I am talking about food. That is basic. When we talk about key sectors, feeding the public is the foundation of everything. I am very pleased to support this bill. A food day will be wonderful. It needs to be used as a launch pad for what comes next. Let us do something meaningful and put our words into action.
1498 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Apr/17/23 12:10:19 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, we spent two weeks in our ridings, and now we are back in the House for a long stretch together. When I met with the people of Laurentides—Labelle, I saw that they are worried about access to affordable housing. I would like to hear my colleague's views on that because, in my riding at least, people have been talking about the housing crisis for years. For more than 10 years, community organizations have been predicting what would happen. The Quebec organization FRAPRU has been saying the same thing. I do not know if the situation is the same in my colleague's riding, but I would like to know what he thinks of what is in the budget for housing.
125 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Apr/17/23 12:40:46 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, obviously, there are some worthwhile measures in this budget. We are not going to say no to a good thing. However, I wonder whether some steps are being skipped in implementing these procedures. I would like my colleague to tell us more about two aspects.
First, I see that $31 million will be allocated to establish a national counter-foreign interference office. Obviously, we agree with the idea. However, does my colleague not think that the commission of inquiry we have been calling for for months should take place before the national office is established, since the commission would obviously have some useful findings to contribute?
Second, there is something in the budget that is dear to my heart, and that is the issue of planned obsolescence. The budget states that the government plans to work to implement the right to repair. How will it ensure that goods purchased in Quebec and Canada can be repaired when they break or require fixing?
166 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Mr. Speaker, I remember last February 8 when all the parties voted in favour of including supply management protection in international agreements. All the parties voted for Bill C‑282. I know that some people remember that. Maybe it is time that the political parties remembered too. At this time, in committee, the Conservatives are filibustering to block Bill C-282. They keep stalling, slowing down procedures and generally wasting time. They are doing everything they possibly can to undermine a bill they actually voted for.
It is such a sad spectacle, when the very future of Quebec agriculture hangs in the balance.
I am calling on all Quebec members from every party. All of the parties promised to protect supply management and voted in favour of this vital bill. My Quebec colleagues, Conservatives and Liberals alike, all gave farmers their word. I can assure them that our farmers remember. Today, the time has come for them to honour their word.
162 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Apr/17/23 2:39:45 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, like my colleague, I saw the results of the poll and the various studies.
It is very concerning to see that we might lose so many of our agricultural producers. That is why we are working in collaboration with the Government of Quebec on various options.
We have just signed the $3.5‑billion sustainable Canadian agricultural partnership. That is an increase of $500 million. We are also looking at emergency programs. In fact, when the Prime Minister met with the UPA, he said that we would work together on bringing in a targeted measure to help those who may be having a tough time getting through the year.
113 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Apr/17/23 2:57:12 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, the disaster financial assistance arrangement, which is organized and managed by the federal government, works very closely with all of the provinces. We worked with the Province of Quebec, in particular, on a number of the disasters that have impacted that community. We have always been there for it. When those receipts are submitted to the government for reimbursement, we have been able to act expeditiously in every case.
71 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Apr/17/23 2:57:39 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, Quebec and its towns are still adding up the cost and compiling a list of the damage caused by the ice storm. There is no need to wait, because Ottawa already owes $484 million from the last crisis.
At the time, Ottawa refused to compensate Hydro‑Québec, claiming that Crown corporations were not eligible for disaster relief. That has become an embarrassing excuse, since the federal government invested billions of dollars in Muskrat Falls in Newfoundland and Labrador. Quebec is only asking for its fair share to repair the damage from the ice storm.
When will the federal government pay the $484 million it owes us?
113 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Apr/17/23 2:58:22 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, we obviously share the sentiments of our colleague when it comes to the gratitude we have for the men and women who worked so hard in Quebec and in other provinces to restore power after the ice storm. We are obviously concerned about those who have suffered losses. There is an agreement between Canada and all the provinces to help recoup money and reimburse costs eligible under the agreements that have been in place for decades.
We are working with the Government of Quebec. We understand the urgent need to take action. That is precisely what we will do in partnership with the Government of Quebec.
108 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Apr/17/23 4:45:26 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, I congratulate my colleague on her enjoyable speech. We see that she is very passionate about the Canadian Armed Forces and their importance. I share her desire to support our veterans, especially the members of the armed forces who protect and serve us every day.
There were some things missing from the last budget. The omissions were rather striking. We are currently experiencing a housing crisis. There is a crisis going on across Canada and Quebec, affecting a number of regions, including my own, the Lower St. Lawrence. It is undeniable. There is also another crisis, the labour shortage. My colleague briefly touched on it when she was talking about the need for the Canadian Armed Forces to attract and retain service members. There is nothing in the budget, no key measures. The Bloc Québécois has proposed several, including tax incentives to allow experienced workers to work a few hours or days a week. There are other measures that could give some breathing room to people who want to join the workforce to help our business owners.
I would like my colleague to share her point of view on the complete absence of measures to deal with—
204 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Apr/17/23 5:31:07 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, I agree with my colleague. All levels of government have a responsibility when it comes to housing. That is true. However, the federal government has fallen behind. It is appalling. Nothing has been done for years, and now we have a lot of catching up to do.
As far as Quebec is concerned, it is a shame that it took three years of negotiations between Ottawa and Quebec to finally get the money out the door and see projects get off the ground. We are very behind.
In Montreal alone, there are 24,000 people on a waiting list for social housing. Social housing is the best way to lift people out of poverty and give them a real hand up. The federal government is still not doing enough.
While it is true that a housing strategy has been put in place, it has not been improved and it is not meeting the real needs of people in the community. We want to see the federal government investing more heavily in social housing.
178 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Apr/17/23 5:32:09 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, I would like to know what my colleague thinks about the federal and provincial areas of jurisdiction. There is a Québec Solidaire motion before the Quebec National Assembly that states that health care falls under Quebec's exclusive jurisdiction. Quebec is asking for unconditional financial compensation for dental care, and it wants that amount transferred so it can improve coverage for a program it already has.
I would like to know what the member for Rosemont—La Petite-Patrie thinks of that request for unconditional financial compensation.
93 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Apr/17/23 5:32:52 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, I will quickly respond with “a promise is a promise”. We campaigned on that. We promised Quebeckers and Canadians that if they elected us to the House, we would work to make dental care accessible for the most vulnerable members of society and the middle class. That is exactly what we are doing, without interfering in Quebec's health care system. We will not tell hospitals what to do. We will not even open dental clinics. We will take the bill and pay it. That will make a significant difference in the lives of people in need, those without private insurance who cannot afford to see a dentist.
I am very eager to go see Quebeckers and tell them that, thanks to the NDP, they can now have nice teeth, a beautiful smile, and pay their dental bill.
143 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- menumenu
- notificationsnotifications
- home
- mailmail
- searchsearch
