44th Parl. 1st Sess.
June 8, 2023 10:00AM
- Jun/8/23 11:14:35 a.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, I am splitting my time with my colleague, the member for Chicoutimi—Le Fjord.
As we know, the former speaker of the House of Representatives, Tip O'Neill, said, “All politics are local.” I am going to focus on what has been happening in my community, my district, in the last two weeks.
At 3:30 p.m. on Sunday, May 28, two weekends ago, first responders in Halifax arrived in the Westwood Hills subdivision in Halifax. This is in my district, 10 minutes from my house. They were responding to reports of a house on fire. They were there in minutes. The fire was driven by winds of 40 kilometres an hour, and it was spreading rapidly through the house and moving to other homes in this family suburban neighbourhood. It was engulfing homes and hopscotching from house to house. It was missing some, burning others and skipping and bouncing over streets. Cellphones screamed with an alert for residents to immediately leave their homes. Over the next hour, as the wind drove the flames across neighbourhoods along Hammonds Plains Road, more than 16,000 people were evacuated.
Many, not knowing what to do, went to the homes of friends and family outside the evacuation zone. Others went to the comfort centres, which were set up quickly by volunteers. Some were set up within an hour, such as the ones at the Black Point fire hall and Black Point & Area Community Centre on St. Margarets Bay and the Canada Games Centre in Bayers Lake. They were set up by volunteers, such as Janet Fryday Dorey, who opened the Black Point comfort centre and kept it open from then until this day.
The volunteers at the centres were and are remarkable. They put their lives and families on hold to provide comfort, food, clothes, a place to sleep, a person to talk to, a place to help find accommodation and a place to regroup in this trying, confusing and emotional time. There were volunteers like my neighbour, Peggy Pippy, who ran food and clothing drives for victims.
To give some idea of the desperation of the evacuation, I want to share an experience. Captain Kevin Corkum and firefighter Conor Scott were working at the firefighting command post on Hammonds Plains Road in Halifax on that Sunday when an emergency call came in. A family could not get to their elderly father, who has dementia and was at home on Yankeetown Road. This was inside the evacuation zone, where the fire was raging.
Fire crews had retreated from the area because of the speed of the fire, which was making it unsafe for them to battle the intensity of the flames. Captain Corkum said, “When the 911 call came in [saying] that there was a person in the house, we knew that fire conditions were going to be bad on that road.... But that's what we do. We're the fire service. Our main objective is life safety.”
Captain Corkum said that he and firefighter Scott, wearing only basic personal protective gear, and with no oxygen equipment, jumped into the chief's pickup truck to attempt to save the man. Firefighter Scott said, “There were moments when it felt like we were driving through a wall of fire”. Captain Corkum reported that “as they travelled toward Yankeetown Road, day turned into night, and visibility was zero.” They could not see the civic numbers and ended up passing the home twice before they found the driveway. “As we pulled up, everything around the house was on fire. There were trees on two sides, maybe 20 to 30 feet away, and everything was on fire,” the captain said. Captain Corkum was driving and instructed firefighter Scott that he had 30 seconds to check the house for the man. Both doors were locked, so Scott ended up kicking in the front door.
Captain Corkum said, “The elderly gentleman was in his chair unaware of what was going on, unaware of the danger [around him].” Corkum and Scott grabbed the man, lifted him up and carried him into the truck, with only minutes, maybe even seconds, to get out, and “Captain Corkum said it was one of those moments that ‘you're there doing what has to be done.’” “It's the first time,” he said, “in my 22 years that I'm looking around...and I'm like, ‘I really don't know that I'm 100 per cent going to get out of this’”.
According to Captain Corkum, “Luckily...they were able to make it through the smoke and embers to get the man to the command post, where he could be assessed by paramedics.” After, Scott said, “My heart grew a little bit. I was very, very happy when we passed him off”.
He continued:
And then it was just moments later before we're on to the next task. But there was this brief, beautiful moment where we knew he was going to get back to his family.
Corkum and Scott “then went on to help evacuate a home in Upper Tantallon, where a family was still packing items” and could not escape.
Captain Corkum said to the media, “It was an unprecedented fire for me, just with the speed and the forward momentum that fire had and just the sheer amount of fire”. He went on to say, “I've never seen anything like it in my 22 years, that's for sure.”
According to Brendan Meagher, “even though the pair knew it was dangerous, they kept going.” He stated:
They kept going, they got to the house, they got in and they got him in that truck and...they got out of there and they saved his life.
I believe, as do most Nova Scotians, that what they did was remarkable and heroic.
According to Captain Corkum, this was only one story of those told during these devastating fires. I'm sure there are many people with many stories of real heroism that we will hear from in the coming days.
I would like to share with members another experience I had during this time in my riding last week. The next day after that fire, Monday, May 29, after attending the morning news conference with the Halifax deputy fire chief, I drove two hours south to the town of Shelburne. I went to the fire hall and command centre, which was managing the fire for the municipality. I met with Fire Chief Locke. He and his crew had just arrived back from Clyde River, where they were battling the spread of the Barrington Lake fire. It was quickly becoming the largest fire in the history of Nova Scotia, with 65,000 acres on fire. In Clyde River, the fire had jumped the highway, as it had jumped across the lake a few hours earlier. Chief Locke told me that the freight train speed and the power of the fire overcame the firefighters, who had to abandon their hoses and gear and jump into their trucks; they barely escaped with their lives.
He has been a firefighter for 50 years, and he had a hard time with his emotions as he described what his team faced. The flames they were battling reached 200 feet high and whirled around them. This happened time and again to crews battling this beast.
Half the county was evacuated. Yesterday, the fire was only declared held; it is not growing beyond the 65,000 acres. More than 200 kilometres of the area has been destroyed. The Halifax fire is now 100% contained.
The two fires incinerated more than 300 private property houses and buildings, destroying homes, dreams, family treasures, vehicles and everything dear to these families, and to us, including pets, dogs and cats, that were lost in the flames. The job of rebuilding for these families is immense. It is going to take time before everyone can return home safely. Knowing that the fire cannot resurface and restart is essential.
The 190 professional volunteer firefighters who have kept the Barrington Lake fire out of the towns of Barrington and Shelburne are exhausted. They worked 18 hours a day. A member of my constituency team, Tyson Ross, is one of these firefighters; he slept in his own bed for the first time two nights ago. However, they know the work is not done. They need to get the 65,000 acres secure and fire-free before residents, who simply want to go home, can do so safely.
They left their jobs to save their communities. They left their families to risk their lives to save others. They left their own evacuated houses in the fire zone to save the houses of their neighbours and strangers. The words “thank you” seem desperately insufficient for what they have done for our province and these communities, given what we owe them.
Nonetheless, I will conclude by thanking the volunteer firefighters who fought and controlled the fires at Beech Hill Road and Pubnico. I want to send an enormous thanks to the hundreds of firefighters who fought, and got under control, the Halifax fire, and who have enabled all but a few thousand of the 16,000 residents to return home. From the bottom of my heart, I thank the 190 firefighters who have fought, and continue to fight, the largest fire in the history of our province, known as the Barrington Lake fire, and the Lake Road fires in Shelburne County, over the last 14 days.
1629 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Jun/8/23 11:24:51 a.m.
- Watch
While I have the floor for a second, I just want to echo that. This was in a neighbouring riding, and one of those fires was in my community as well. My thanks go to the firefighters, who responded from all over southwest Nova Scotia.
Questions and comments, the hon. Minister of Environment and Climate Change.
56 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Jun/8/23 11:26:13 a.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, as an MP who understands his riding and was on the ground during these fires and talking to firefighters, I know what started the fires. The reason I wrote that is because the Halifax fire was a fire in the suburbs. The minister should know this, but he apparently does not. It was not a forest fire. It ran through houses. Sixteen thousand people were evacuated, not in a forest but in a suburb.
76 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Jun/8/23 11:29:28 a.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, the member for Nanaimo—Ladysmith and I served together on the fisheries committee, and she is very passionate about the fisheries issues, as am I.
I am surprised she did not ask me about Bill C-365 from the 42nd Parliament, which was introduced by our colleague on the fisheries committee, the member for North Okanagan—Shuswap. His bill sought to amend the Criminal Code to establish specific penalties related to the theft of firefighting equipment. It also would have created an aggravating circumstance for sentencing if the mischief involved firefighting equipment. Finally, it would have established sentencing objectives in relation to the theft of such equipment.
Rather than expressing support for the firefighters, which the member had a chance to do, the Bloc and the Liberals at that time, although I know the member is of the class of 2021 and was not there, all voted against the bill that would have penalized people for stealing firefighting equipment to help us fight these fires.
169 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Jun/8/23 11:42:01 a.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague from Lac‑Saint‑Jean.
I think now is the time for solidarity. We have to be very careful, we have to make sure that people are safe, but also, and this is what we will be looking at later, whether the resources and equipment are adequate when situations like the one we are experiencing now arise, and whether the staff and firefighters have all the necessary resources.
Once again, I would like to thank my colleague from Lac‑Saint‑Jean, and I am sure that he will also be working hard in his riding in the coming weeks.
108 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Jun/8/23 1:02:20 p.m.
- Watch
- Re: Bill S-5
Madam Speaker, as I begin speaking about this very important topic in the motion, which, in part, asks us to stand in solidarity with and express support for all those affected by the current forest fires and to acknowledge that climate change is having a direct impact on people's quality of life and is exacerbating the frequency and scale of extreme weather and climate events, I want to extend my heartfelt gratitude to all the firefighters working night and day to control and put out the over 431 fires raging across our country in over seven provinces and territories.
I come from a very urbanesque riding, where people do not get to see what forest fires are really all about. Over this past week, I heard from constituents, and have experienced myself here in Ottawa, what smog from a forest fire hundreds of kilometres away feels like and the impact it has on our health and well-being. Schools in my riding have cancelled classes and recess to prevent kids from going outdoors so they are not breathing in a lot of really toxic fumes.
We tend to think about climate change as a concept that is out there, which we do not really connect with in urban centres like mine, but the forest fires this year have really grounded people, in my riding especially, in what the reality of climate change is, in Canada and across the world. It really begs the questions of what we can do, when we should have done it and how we can accelerate the process to ensure that the track we are on is delayed, smothered and stopped.
In the past seven years of the Liberal government, there have been significant steps taken. Bill S-5 is one of the very good ones that ensure recognition that climate change is, indeed, a crisis right now. We do need to invest further in protecting our environment, not just here in Canada but also in building partnerships abroad. More and more Canadians are realizing now that climate change is real.
What has happened so far this year, and what is anticipated to happen over the next weeks and months, with forest fires in our country is setting for us a very clear path forward: We need to protect our planet. We need to do it by partnering with industry, civil society and all levels of government here in Canada through multilateral partnerships, and we need to do it with individual Canadians, because until and unless we really all come together on this, the outcome does look bleak.
The climate crisis right now is more urgent than ever. Canada is already experiencing an increase in heat waves; wildfires, as we have seen; and heavy storms. The poor air quality here in Ottawa over the last few days, as a result of the forest fires, is just a very small example. The impacts and the economic and health repercussions that come with them will continue if we do not accelerate what we are acting on now.
Since 2015, the government has taken significant action to protect the environment, to conserve nature and biodiversity, and to respond to the threat of climate change. Even so, we need to do more, and that is what I am hoping this motion will continue to do: push us and drive us together collectively, as a whole of government, partisan politics aside, to really tackle the issue of what climate change looks like now, what it will look like 50 years from now for our children and grandchildren, and the impact it will have on their lives.
We know the world's major economies are moving at an unprecedented pace to fight climate change, retooling their economies and building the net-zero industries of tomorrow. In fact, earlier today I had a conversation with one of those companies that is part of that industry, talking about its pathways initiative, which would lead to net zero; its investments in clean technology; and how they could transition. When industry comes together, when companies come together, when they work with government and when they work with indigenous communities, that is how we are going to develop a foundational, strong pathway forward to fighting climate change. The accelerating transition to net zero has started a global race to attract investment, as our friends and allies build their clean economies.
Canada has to keep the pace; we cannot afford to fall behind. Despite our competitive advantages and the foundational investments we have made in building Canada's clean economy over the past seven years, there are two fundamental challenges Canada has to address. The first is that many of the investments that will be critical for the realignment of global supply chains and the net-zero future are large-scale, long-term investments. Some investments may require developing infrastructure, while others may require financial incentives or a patient source of financial capital. For Canada to remain competitive, we must continue to build a framework that supports these types of investments in Canada. That is what we are doing with budget 2023.
Two weeks ago, I was happy to announce an investment by the government into a clean-tech company in my riding, Stromcore, which is now building batteries to replace biodiesel, to replace fuel in the manufacturing industry, for forklifts. Its work is profound, cutting-edge and part of the whole conversation about how we transition to being clean, to ensuring that climate change is curbed and to ensuring that our future generations have a clean environment to live in.
The second challenge is the passage of the United States' Inflation Reduction Act. It poses a major challenge to our ability to compete in the industries that will drive Canada's clean economy. Canada has taken a market-driven approach to emissions reduction. Our world-leading carbon pollution pricing system not only puts money back in the pockets of Canadians, but also is efficient and highly effective, because it provides a clear economic signal to businesses and allows them the flexibility to find the most cost-effective way to lower their emissions.
I realize that Canadians, during this very difficult time, feel the pinch, but the majority of people in my riding understand and appreciate that, yes, we do need to feel the pinch because we do have a world to protect, we do have to fight climate change, and each and every one of us has to to do our part. This includes the current government, past governments and future governments. It includes all levels of government, civil society, individual Canadians and, across the board, the global community.
There is so much more we need to do. I am very proud of the efforts the Liberal government has made in ensuring that we are fighting climate change, that we are providing resources as these wildfires rage, and that we are working together with all parties across the aisle to ensure that we continue to fight that good fight.
1173 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Jun/8/23 4:23:18 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, as someone who was a firefighter for seven and a half years, I know a thing or two about firefighting. I also know we cannot always have all the resources at our fingertips, but we have other folks around us, from other municipalities, provinces and, quite frankly, across the country, who come to the firefighters' rescue.
As we are now seeing U.S. cities filling up with smoke, would the member agree with me that we have to use more of a national strategy and work with our partners in the United States to fight fires on both sides of the border?
104 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Jun/8/23 4:26:27 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, I would like to start my comments by thinking of those individuals who have had to weather the forest fires, particularly those who live and work in the communities who, whether in terms of recreational, work or living environments, have incurred a great deal of hardship. One cannot underestimate the degree to which these fires have impacted literally thousands of lives in a very real and tangible way. We recognize the interruptions that have taken place as a direct result.
However, we do not often hear about a wildfire taking place in a particular community. It might be on the news for a day or two, maybe more than that, but what remains in these communities is there for a long time. It takes a while for a community to bounce back. To those individuals, I want to extend my best wishes and recognize what they are going through, which is a great difficulty that no doubt creates much anxiety and stress. They should know that they have a national government that is doing what it can in co-operation with different levels of government, stakeholders and non-profits. Obviously, the Government of Canada will do whatever it can with respect to our firefighters; whether they are paid or volunteer firefighters, the government has their back.
The second thing I will comment on is the firefighters. The other day, the Prime Minister was talking to me and others about a situation, which was referred to earlier today. Two firefighters were called into a home just north of Halifax. There was an elderly gentleman with dementia who had gone missing, and family members called in expressing concern. They were not too sure where he was, but they believed he was actually still in the home. The two firefighters busted down the door and went into the home, with smoke all around and flames flying. They found the elderly gentleman sitting in a chair, in good part unaware of what was taking place, and they rescued him. In a very humble way, both firefighters said, in essence, “That's what we do.”
I think that those two fine gentlemen embody the spirit and goodwill that we see day in and day out in our first responders, both from those who get paid and those who volunteer. I think I can speak on behalf of all members, no matter what political party, in recognizing the efforts of our firefighters. This is where I wanted to start things off.
It is an interesting process when we see disasters in communities. In Manitoba, we have had forest fires and floods, and I will provide comments on both situations. However, right now, I want to recognize these three provinces in particular: Quebec, Nova Scotia and Alberta.
I also want to talk about how people come together. Let us recognize that. The government plays a very important role. There is absolutely no doubt of that, and I will expand on that. However, we see people come together when there are tragedies that take place in communities. They do this in different forms, whether it is through volunteering, sending money or other forms of support. It could be as simple as a prayer at a local gurdwara, church, mosque or synagogue. It could be sending support in the form of cash. We see that time and time again.
In Alberta, we saw people from Manitoba pitching in to help fight the wildfires. We have a wonderful neighbour, the United States, to the south of us. President Biden was talking with the Prime Minister of Canada. As one member referenced, smoke and wildfires do not know any boundaries.
The smoke from the fires from the province of Quebec is travelling all over the place and crossing international boundaries. I would suggest that it did not even have to take that for the President of the United States and the Prime Minister to have a discussion; we now have individuals from the United States coming north to help us deal with the wildfires.
Whether it is the communities at the micro level, the different levels of government or international relations, we see people coming together. This is because we recognize the harm being done, not only to our communities but also to our environment as a whole. That is why we have such programs as the disaster program, which is there to support Canadians, because disasters take place.
I looked something up. I understand that it was actually Pierre Elliott Trudeau who established the program, the request for federal assistance, back in 1970. It was an interesting figure that I received. It is estimated that 280 events have happened since 1970. If we put that into the perspective of what we have witnessed over the last few years, there is no doubt that we are seeing an increase.
Interestingly enough, in terms of those direct federal contributions, we are looking at close to $8 billion over that time frame. We can look at what we are spending today in terms of disaster support. A hurricane hit Atlantic Canada, resulting in hundreds of millions of dollars in damage. Homes were destroyed. The municipality went to the province. The province then came to Ottawa, and Ottawa has been there to support Atlantic Canada after that storm. We continue to be there today to support Canadians, as we are there today for the people of Alberta, Quebec and other jurisdictions where we see these disasters taking place.
In the past, my home province of Manitoba has had forest fires and floods displace thousands of people. We need to recognize that there are things the government can do that will, in fact, make a difference. One of the best examples that comes to mind, as I see my colleague from Dauphin—Swan River—Neepawa walk in, is “Duff's Ditch”.
A premier from Manitoba said that one of the ways we can avoid the city of Winnipeg flooding all the time is to build a floodway around the city. If we look at the south, where the water comes from, the floodway takes the water just before it enters the city. When the Red River is overflowing, Duff's Ditch will take the overflow around the city. It takes it around via the east and then dumps it back into the Red River once it is north of the city.
What an idea that is. This is the type of investment that we need. We need to become more resilient. Former Premier Duff Roblin has often been referred to as a visionary for trying to deal with this particular issue. I can tell members that, with respect to the amount of real dollars, even factoring in inflation, billions have been saved as a direct result of this. The premier at the time realized the benefit of looking at what is being thrown at us through the environment. By doing this, people's lives were protected in many ways, and property was protected in terms of flooding. There have been occasions when we have had floods in the city and in the Point Douglas area, the area I represented. Back in 1997, I can say that the federal government was supporting the area. I remember when Jean Chrétien came to Point Douglas to support Canadians in the north end of Winnipeg at a time when we had needs. Therefore, there have still been issues.
I use that as an example, because one of the things that we need to recognize is that climate change has really had a profound impact on weather patterns. Because of emissions and other environmental factors, we are seeing a greater number of disasters. As a result, different levels of government need to take more action. We have a national government that states that it has set up a national adaption strategy. It is the first time ever. As a national government, we are saying that we need to have a strategy that encourages municipalities, provinces and others to look at ways in which we can improve the infrastructure, so that when disasters hit, we can minimize the cost and the damage to our communities. There is no question about whether that will happen.
We are talking about 1.6 billion new federal dollars. That is on top of the $8 billion that we put in place since we have been in government. No government in the history of this nation has invested more in infrastructure than the current government has. That is why, when I hear some opposition members saying that we are not doing enough or asking what the is government doing, I would suggest that they review some of the budgets that have been introduced. They will see hundreds of millions of dollars, going into multiple billions, to invest in things like infrastructure. They have seen a government focused on dealing with the environment in a very real and tangible way. Whether it is working with indigenous, provincial or territorial governments, the federal government understands and appreciates that there is joint jurisdiction in many different areas, and the environment is one of them.
Earlier today, someone posed a question in regard to our oceans. I happened to be sitting beside the minister responsible for oceans, and she gave the answer. Canada has three oceans from coast to coast to coast. Often, people forget about the north. Do people know that under 1% was actually protected when we formed government back in late 2015? Not even 1% of our coastal Canadian waters, which we are responsible for, were actually protected. Today, one can multiply that by almost 15. Just under 15% of Canada's coastal waters are now under protection.
What was even more encouraging is that the minister responsible for oceans talked about 2025. There is a very good chance that, as a government, we are going to hit 25% of our oceans being protected. We have the Prime Minister and cabinet saying that this is not good enough, and we can even attempt to do better. By 2030, let us see if we can get it up to 30% of our coastal waters. I believe that we are on target to hit that type of a milestone.
The amount of land being converted for conservation has dramatically increased under the government. I believe we have even seen the adoption of what could be three, maybe more, new national parks under the government.
They say let us talk about other policies. We have budgetary policies, or monetary policies, and we have legislative policies, or initiatives. Let me give members an example of both.
From a legislative perspective, we have brought in legislation to have net-zero emissions by 2050. For the first time ever, we now have, in legislation, a law that says that Canada will be at net-zero by 2050. That is a very important commitment in law that is coming from the Government of Canada, a legislative initiative.
We also have a budgetary initiative that will have, and has had, a very positive impact on Canada's environment and the people of Canada, which is the price on pollution. The Conservatives call it a carbon tax.
Countries from all around the world, back in 2015, went to Paris, and one of the points that came out of Paris was the idea of a price on pollution. It was not a new idea, but it was amplified in Paris back in 2015. It was not new because the first government in North America to have a price on pollution was the Province of Alberta. It was a Progressive Conservative government in Alberta that brought it in.
It was not new. When this government adopted it, we brought it back to Canada. We said that we are going to have a price on pollution because it is the right thing to do. We instituted a rebate to support Canadians. The system works so that there is an incentive, whether one is a consumer or one is within the industry, for less emissions, for ensuring that we see actions being taken to protect our environment.
The Conservatives have been all over the map, like a fish out of water, flipping and flopping, depending on who their leader is. The current leader says they do not support the price on pollution. I am hoping that fish is not dead yet, and we will get another flop or a flip. I am hopeful.
I believe there are members of the Conservative caucus who understand the benefits of a price on pollution. There were leadership candidates, although they lost, mind, in the Conservative caucus who actually support it. It is always interesting to watch when the Conservatives get a little bit embarrassed or humiliated on that particular issue.
2147 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Mr. Speaker, half of me wants to stand on a point of order and speak about this great colleague of mine for suggesting that perhaps he is better looking than I am, but we will let the public be both the judge and the jury on that.
Ironically, although I do not smell like smoked meat, I did appreciate the fact that he spoke about the firefighters in the field, because the truth of the matter is that I was a firefighter for seven and a half years. I put out many a wheat fire and grass fire, many of which were actually caused, unfortunately, by our farming industry, so I appreciate his bringing that up.
It brings me great pride today to stand here in this place on behalf of the fantastic residents of Essex, who sent me here. I say “thanks” to them.
Before I dive into the bill, in great support of the member for Cypress Hills—Grasslands's private member's bill, Bill C-294, I do want to just send out heartfelt thanks and best wishes to the firefighters across Canada, who are battling, so dearly and desperately, the raging wildfires.
I have said it before and am proud to say it: My father was the milkman in Essex, with Lewis Dairy. As I always say, am I ever happy that my mother opened the door when he dropped off that milk to the house, because, otherwise, I would not be here today. The reason I say that is that I have heard many stories from my dad about how farming equipment, both in the dairy industry and in the grain industry, has evolved. I know it to be true, because I grew up on a farm.
I, myself, do sharecropping, so I have my own farm. I see the various utility equipment that goes onto a tractor or goes onto a combine. Bless my wife and my daughter for loving horses so much, all five of them. Now we are getting into hay. I suppose it is easy for me to speak to this because all the different farming takes a whole bunch of different utility equipment, to not only harvest but to also plant these crops. I look at this equipment and I look at the interchangeability, the opportunity to save a few thousand dollars, for a thrasher from one company to another that perhaps would not or could not interchange with a Case tractor, a John Deere tractor or a New Holland tractor.
I will then also take it one step further. Especially in Essex, where we are somewhat landlocked in that we are surrounded by three bodies of water, land is, quite frankly, at a premium. It is darn expensive, but it is really expensive, and almost unheard of, for our next generation of young adults not just to be able to afford a home and start a family but also to take over the family legacy, which is the farm. They need every opportunity, every possibility possible, to ensure that they can even begin to think about taking over the local farm.
I have two amazing sons and an amazing daughter. Both of my sons spend a lot of time on the farm. They are grease monkeys, and I am darn proud of them for being grease monkeys. They repair a lot of the farming equipment that, quite frankly, I break. Whether it is cutting the laneways or plowing in the headlands, there is always a screw, a nut, a bolt or a washer that just does not fit anymore. It gets worn out. The cost to repair that, the cost that our farming community goes through because something is not interchangeable, is absolutely astronomical. I think about when we blow a belt on that same utility that I cut the fence rows on. I am sure the member for Cypress Hills—Grasslands would know how expensive a farming belt is, especially when one has to bring it in from overseas.
If we start today, if we start in this beautiful country today, to make the equipment interchangeable, the lives of farmers today and the future for the next generations will be that much easier.
My brother-in-law, Rob Reid, has been with the Ridgetown agricultural college, a subsidiary or sister college to Guelph University, for a number of years. He has been in charge of the dairy and the hogs, but he also does all the work with the college training students for future generations with regard to the equipment.
This year, I will have been happily be married to my lovely, loved wife Allison for 25 years, so I have known Rob for about 30 years. I have heard the stories, the trials and tribulations at the college. It has to really watch the money it spends, when it spends a whole bunch of money on one type of equipment, and five, six, seven or 10 years later, when half of the equipment comes to the end of its useful life, it has to buy new additions to that equipment. The tractor still works, but the plow or the thrasher or the planter needs to be replaced, and it is not interchangeable. Therefore, the college has to basically start from zero. What does that do? It not only costs the college, but, ultimately, it also costs the students. As if it were not tough enough to go to college now, and as if it were not tough enough to excite future young adults to get into farming and take over their family business, now the cost of tuition has just gone crazy, right through the roof. Therefore, this private member's bill only checks all the important boxes of what the future of Canadian farming looks like going forward.
I think about Vollans farm equipment business, just around the corner from my house, and about how many times I have taken my Zero-Turn lawnmower there if, as was previously mentioned, there was a nut falling out of the bottom, or there was a worn out U-joint. If it were not for Vollans, and I do not have a lot of money in my pockets here today, I would have a whole lot less money in my pockets, because it is so unique and so excellent in how it is able to adapt various pieces of equipment and put them together. However, we are now getting into the digital age, which allows for an interface of two digital systems coming together to put together two pieces of critical infrastructure needed to feed Canadians, put food on the table of Canadians and, quite frankly, to feed the world, as well as to make life much, much more exciting and more affordable for our farming industry.
Essex, as I mentioned, is a very small, landlocked, area, but it is a very vital area. As a matter of fact, the majority of the grain produced in Essex, and this should put a smile on a lot of faces here, goes straight to our distilleries. If members like Crown Royal, they will probably like the fact that we grow a lot of corn. Now that I have everybody's attention, they probably know just how important this private member's bill is.
To conclude, I am a very proud son of an amazing father who taught me a whole bunch about farming, as did my grandfather while he was still alive. I am proud to be partners with Greg Eisler, a fantastic farmer who farms my land alongside me. Also, I really want to thank, one final time, my dear friend, the member who represents Cypress Hills—Grasslands incredibly well, for bringing this private member's bill forward.
1303 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Mr. Speaker, it is always a pleasure to rise on behalf of my community of Kelowna—Lake Country.
Before I begin this evening, I would like to thank all the firefighters and first responders who are keeping my community safe, as well as all firefighters across Canada. Firefighters run toward and into danger and put their own safety at risk every day. As a daughter of a firefighter, I also know how hard it is for families with the worries they have. I want to thank them for commitment and for keeping people safe.
I will be splitting my time with the member of Parliament for Calgary Shepard.
Today I rise to speak on Bill C-33, a substantive piece of legislation that I am sad to say is missing the mark on a significant opportunity to strengthen our ports and rail lines with regard to supply chain functionality and security issues. I have had several shadow ministry roles that have involved supply chains within Canada and trade, which means that I have spoken to hundreds and hundreds of organizations, both big and small, that either rely on a functioning rail and port system or are involved in keeping our supply chains moving.
I have spoken with a wide variety of industries, from winemaking to RV rentals, all of which have been financially challenged by the sluggishness of the Liberal government in looking at ways within the authority of the federal government to ensure our supply chains are moving.
Canada's economic security and food security should be a priority. When supply chains break down or are not functioning at full capacity, all Canadians are affected. Costs go up, and Canada loses credibility with our trading partners.
Small businesses ultimately pay the biggest price when supply chains break down, as they have fewer resources. When it comes to strengthening our supply chains, this legislation has missed the mark. The Chamber of Shipping said that the legislation misses out on addressing the root causes of supply chain congestion and that the additional powers only address symptoms of congestion and could aggravate managing cargo efficiency.
This legislation also does not address the relationship between shippers and rail companies, and there is nothing about rail service reliability.
The legislation before us is more interested in increasing the powers of the Minister of Transport inside the boardrooms of our port authorities than actually strengthening the ability to move goods around and in and out of our economy or in addressing safety. It burdens our Canadian ports, particularly the smaller ports, with inefficient and anti-competitive red tape and increases in cost, which will always be passed on to consumers. It undermines the arm's-length independence with which ports are supposed to operate, with the federal government inserting Ottawa-knows-best politicians in board level decision-making.
I would like to go into more detail on my point regarding the issues this bill raises in complicating the governance of port authority boards.
The Minister of Transport, when he first spoke about this bill, said:
These measures involve providing the Minister of Transport with the ability to designate the chairperson of the board from among the board members and in consultation with the board. This measure would ensure Canadian port authorities and our government are aligned on how we deal with the increasing complex economic, social and environmental issues facing our ports.
He said, “aligned with the government”. What does that mean? Does it mean aligned with government ideologies, aligned by designating? As the minister said, “designating” is a word that basically means appointing. Is that Liberal friends? We have seen these kinds of actions before, with the Liberal government appointing Liberal friends, have we not?
Anyone who is on one of these boards should be offended that the transport minister and the Liberal government do not think that they are smart enough or capable enough to choose their own board chair out of the group of people sitting around the table. These are independent boards, and the Liberals are bringing politics to these board tables. It is basic board of director governance that members of a board should choose who the board chair is.
The minister also said about the legislation that it is:
...a requirement for Canada port authorities to undertake a review of governance practices every three years. These reviews would evaluate the effectiveness of board governance practices, such as assessments of conflicts of interest and record-keeping practices. The results of these assessments would be shared with Transport Canada and would inform future policy measures as needed.
As such, a Liberal minister would judge a non-government organization on corporate governance. The Liberal transport minister would be mandating receiving assessments of conflict of interest from these organizations. The Liberal ministers are not exactly known for good conflict of interest judgment. I do not know if the minister has ever been involved in a governance review. I have been involved in more than one, so I can say that it can easily take up to a year to do a proper review, analysis, report, potential restructure and implementation. The government wants the port authorities to do these every three years.
The minister is presuming to be an expert on fulfilling board of director and executive fiduciary duties and would analyze board governance every three years. Though looking at governance should be a practice of any board, mandating through law that port authorities need to do this every few years is burdensome. I ask, to what end?
The Liberal Minister of Transport in Ottawa thinks he knows best how to run a port, so I would like to note that the member for Chilliwack—Hope, when he spoke on Bill C-33, pointed out in his original rebuttal to the minister that it was that minister who chose to ignore the recommendations of port users when they have put forth board nominees. That minister ignored the recommendations of western provinces when they put forth nominees, yet the minister insists on sticking his hands into the board he knows little about.
Port authorities are supposed to be at arm's length from the government, and the red tape of reporting requirements, advisory committees and ministerial selections of executive management would cut against the efficient operation of our ports. It would reverse the arm's length aims of the Liberal government of the 1990s when it wrote the Canada Marine Act, but that is not surprising, as many Canadians have become aware that the Liberal Party of today is no longer the one they once knew.
As I said earlier, I am disappointed this opportunity to act to better the functioning of our ports and railways has been sidelined by red tape and backseat driving. What good there is in updating safety and security protocols is overshadowed by regulatory burdens that consumers will ultimately feel.
The focus of any update to law should be on safety and on economic prosperity, in particular with this piece of legislation. I should also point out that the government's updating of interference or tampering rules means nothing if it does not enforce them. A lack of accountability and an insistence on control have been defining hallmarks of the current Liberal government, leaving Canadians with less money in their pockets and poorer public services. The Ottawa-knows-best approach is how the current Liberal government governs, so on Bill C-33 the Association of Canadian Port Authorities simply said that more government is not the answer.
I fully support improving the security of Canada's transportation system, including ports and marine facilities. I support increasing safety and strengthening our supply systems. However, the legislation before us would do little for these and would create a real Ottawa-knows-best top-down approach by adding burdensome red tape and costs that would ultimately be passed on to Canadians.
1324 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- menumenu
- notificationsnotifications
- home
- mailmail
- searchsearch
