SoVote

Context: House Hansard - 258 - Nov/29/23

Nov/29/23 5:56:02 p.m.
Watch
Re: Bill C-282

Madam Speaker, absolutely. In fact, that is one of the recommendations that I did not have time to talk about. The report recommended that in the agri‑food sector, the cap for foreign workers increase from 10% to 20%. I even proposed 30%, but the majority wanted 20%, so we put 20%. Then the government did it. That is one of the things in the 18 recommendations that was done. I say bravo, but it is likely not enough because we have to be smart and provide access to labour. My colleague is also absolutely right about international trade. A big part of our agricultural production is geared toward international trade. We need to support and develop this aspect. On the other hand, let us not forget that we have other farms that are not export-oriented. I am talking about supply-managed farms. Bill C‑282, which is currently in the Senate, received strong majority support in the House. It should be passed quickly. When I talk about having respect for our farmers and the way they work, it is because these people are essential and are the bedrock of our rural regions. This bill needs to be passed as soon as possible.

206 words

Ms. Marilyn Gladu (Sarnia—Lambton, CPC)

Nov/29/23 5:57:08 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, I thank the member for his very good speech. There is a slaughterhouse capacity problem here in Ontario and Quebec. The Liberals have done nothing to improve the situation. What are the most important recommendations, solutions, measures or anything else for improving this situation?

46 words

Mr. Yves Perron

Nov/29/23 5:57:40 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, I really want to thank my colleague for that great question. I went over that earlier, but this will allow me to reiterate what I said. It is a public investment. It takes ongoing public support for the other small-scale sites. There are a lot of projects that exist already. There is no need to start from square one. I often say that we need to trust the people working on the ground. Let us make a list of the projects that already exist and launch an incentive program and ongoing support to keep it going. It is a societal choice that we need to make: Either we continue to pollute our planet by transporting our animals thousands of kilometres, or we are smart and we set up other sites that could also absorb any overflow if there is a major disruption, as in the case of COVID‑19.

153 words

Mr. Alistair MacGregor (Cowichan—Malahat—Langford, NDP)

Nov/29/23 5:58:26 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, I enjoy serving on the agriculture committee with my colleague. I want to touch on recommendation 14 regarding skills development and the encouragement for training and re-skilling programs. During testimony we heard from UFCW, which represents many workers in our food and processing sectors. In particular, it recommended that the government bring together industry players, representatives of workers and the government, a tripartite representation. I do not think there is enough awareness out there of how technically skilled agricultural jobs have become. A lot of students have a stereotypical and very old-fashioned idea of agriculture, when in fact it is a very technologically specific area. What does my colleague think about the government having to do more to promote awareness of not only the skills required but also the very well- and high-paying jobs that are available and the opportunities that exist in this sector so that we do not always have to rely on importing workers to fill the huge labour gap that exists?

170 words

Mr. Yves Perron

Nov/29/23 5:59:38 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, I thank my colleague for his intelligent question, like the ones he often asks at the Standing Committee on Agriculture and Agri-Food. That is what I was talking about earlier when I spoke about having a vision for the future. When we take action, we need to consider what things will be like in 10 or 20 years. We need to start informing, training and providing information to our young people right away. My colleague mentioned something fundamental at the beginning of his speech. He talked about sitting people down together. The federal government has a hard time doing that. It usually prefers to act as if it has a monopoly on the truth and to launch a nice program that comes with a nice, absolute truth that may not necessarily work. We need to have people in the industry sit down with people in government for a real, serious and solid consultation to see what measures can be taken. Obviously, this will have to be done in a way that respects jurisdictions. That was clearly spelled out in our report. We need to do that and improve training and information programs, because many young people looking for a career are unfamiliar with the field. We have to work on that.

214 words

Mr. Sébastien Lemire (Abitibi—Témiscamingue, BQ)

Nov/29/23 6:00:43 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, I want to pick up on something intriguing my colleague said. He said that Ottawa, which collects half of our taxes, could reinvest a portion of that money in stimulating regional agricultural development. For example, it could invest in abattoirs, which are few and far between right now. The rules say that abattoirs cannot get more that 50% in public money because they are not money-makers in the regions, supposedly. At the same time, if I understand my colleague from Berthier-Maskinongé's brilliant reasoning correctly, he is saying that, if this infrastructure were to be built, it would be much like an investment in an aqueduct or other public spending of that nature in that it would stimulate an entire regional ecosystem. It would stimulate the vitality of our towns and the livelihood of our corner stores because people would live in the area. The federal government could invest money—our money—in our abattoirs, in our regions, instead of spending money to transport our livestock 800 kilometres away to be slaughtered. That impacts the quality of the meat, the environment and animal health. We could do it close to home instead. I would really like to hear my colleague's thoughts on that.

211 words

Mr. Yves Perron

Nov/29/23 6:01:54 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, that is an excellent question, and the member basically answered it for himself. My esteemed colleague from Abitibi—Témiscamingue is absolutely right. He raised a very important point, and he provided a more in-depth explanation of what I was trying to quickly explain earlier. I am talking about a societal choice, about public infrastructure that would create an ecosystem. That is what we need to implement. Such an ecosystem would be in keeping with our environmental policies. We know that, right now, Canada is not even close to meeting its greenhouse gas reduction targets. The government will continue to give nice speeches for the next 10 years, and meanwhile, we will still be dealing with torrential rains, hurricanes, droughts, aphids and all sorts of problems. Can we be consistent, reduce transportation and support the vitality of our regions? I love working with my colleague, and I think that was a great question.

159 words

Mr. Chandra Arya (Nepean, Lib.)

Nov/29/23 6:03:00 p.m.
Watch
Re: Bill C-282

Madam Speaker, there is a private member's bill currently in the Senate, Bill C-282, from a Bloc Québécois member. The Canadian Agri-Food Trade Alliance, which represents 90% of agriculture food exporters, says that if Bill C-282 becomes law, it would be dangerous for future Canadian agri-food exports. The bill would prevent the government from talking about supply management in any future trade negotiations. If it became a problem, would it not affect the agricultural sector, one of the star performers in the Canadian economy, in terms of exports?

97 words

Mr. Yves Perron

Nov/29/23 6:03:48 p.m.
Watch
Re: Bill C-282

Madam Speaker, I want to thank my colleague for that great question. My colleague said that the trade alliance represents 90% of farmers. They often say that, but it actually represents 90% of exporters. That is an important nuance. Of course the alliance is worried, because it believes that we will need these producers in order to develop other markets. What we are being told is that the government supports supply-managed producers, but not to the point of protecting them. It supports them, but it wants to hang onto them as bargaining chips. That is what we want to put an end to with this bill, which aims to ensure the sustainability of the supply management system because it brings stability to our rural areas and promotes dynamic use of our land. It is not in conflict with exports. We are capable of doing two things at the same time. I just got back from a mission abroad. When I go on those missions, I always talk about our food exports. I also champion our exporters, and I want to speak directly to the ones who are tuning in right now. I want them to know that they do not need to fear Bill C‑282. Bill C‑282 is about ensuring sustainability. If we do not pass this bill, foreign producers will get 18% of the dairy market. That is one out of every five litres of milk. When we reduce domestic production, it will not work anymore because it will come flooding in from from outside. If the government decides not to protect these people, it should have the decency to tell them to their faces and buy back their quotas, because to do otherwise would be hypocrisy. These people are essential. We need them. We must pass this bill, which is in danger of being rejected by the House. The government—

320 words

The Assistant Deputy Speaker (Mrs. Carol Hughes)

Nov/29/23 6:05:11 p.m.
Watch

I am sorry, but the member's time is up. Resuming debate, the hon. member for Cowichan—Malahat—Langford.

21 words

Mr. Alistair MacGregor (Cowichan—Malahat—Langford, NDP)

Nov/29/23 6:05:31 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, it is a very real pleasure for me, as the NDP agriculture critic and a proud member of the Standing Committee on Agriculture and Agri-Food for almost six years, to be able to rise on this debate. Let us face it: The House of Commons does not get to review many agriculture committee reports. I am pleased to have this opportunity to participate in a concurrence debate on a report that is quite relevant and important. I am glad we are having this debate today. The agriculture committee is a unique institution within the House of Commons. I have sat on a number of committees as a substitute before. One thing I have always appreciated about the agriculture committee is that we tend to operate very much on a consensus basis. I think it comes from an understanding that no matter what political party a member sitting around that table is from, we realize that we all represent farmers; that is across the political spectrum. We come to the table with different viewpoints, and we certainly stick by our principles. However, the realization that we all represent farmers and want our agricultural industry to do well lends itself to a very respectful tone at the committee. It is rare to see reports coming out of our committee with a dissenting opinion or even a supplementary opinion attached. That is one thing I truly do appreciate. I am very proud to represent a rural riding on Vancouver Island, which has its own long and storied history with agriculture. We have a number of families in the Cowichan Valley that have been farming for five generations. It runs in our blood there. It is certainly not to the scale that we see in the Prairie provinces, but we are very proud of our agricultural history. We are proud of the fact that we are Canada's only Mediterranean coastal climatic zone, which allows us to grow some unique fruits and vegetables that cannot be found anywhere else in Canada. I am proud to come from that region and to speak up for the farmers in my area. When it comes to this particular report, let us get to the heart of the matter. When we are talking about processing capacity, we are essentially talking about a value-added industry in agriculture in Canada. We are all aware that, whether it is raising animals, getting eggs from chickens or growing vegetables or fruits, that is the primary production end of it. Farmers do quite well selling those. We all love going and picking our fresh produce and so on. However, there is a whole other industry that is extremely strong in Canada and carries a lot of economic might, and that is our processing industry. We take those primary products of Canadian agriculture and add value to them. Canadians can go to their local supermarket and look at just the sheer abundance of processed food that we have; I am not talking about the food in the centre aisles, I am talking about anything that has had value added to it. It is important for members to understand that, when we did this report, when we were doing the study into the subject matter, we were right in the middle of COVID-19. The worst had passed, but there was a huge trail of wreckage from that pandemic, on Canada's food industry. We were very much dealing with a lot of people who were still suffering from that crisis and from the trauma that it inflicted on so many who work in this industry. We tabled that report in the spring of 2021. Unfortunately, in the summer, the Prime Minister decided to call what many thought was an unnecessary federal election. As a result, we never got to have a government response to that report. When we reconvened for this 44th Parliament, one of the first orders of business was to retable that report by unanimous consent so that we could actually get the government response to it. That is why it was report number one of this 44th Parliament. COVID-19 was brutal. It changed Canadians' eating habits. We were no longer going out to restaurants, because they were closed by public health orders. We were essentially getting our food from supermarkets. The way the industry had to respond to that sudden and dramatic shift was a bit like an earthquake through the industry. We also know that many of the workers working on farms and working in the food processing factories, the processing plants, were struck down by COVID-19. They tragically succumbed to the disease or became sick and had to be off work for several weeks. Some developed long COVID symptoms and were unable to return to work. That was a huge shock to the system. For an industry that was already suffering from labour shortages to suddenly have its very limited workforce decimated even further was very brutal, and it allowed our committee to take a hard look at the weak links in our supply chains and our ability to feed our local population. I can remember the word I was using as a theme to guide my questioning as a part of that study was “resiliency”. We did not have a lot of resiliency built into the system. One of the things COVID helped us understand is where the weak points in the supply chains are, and we discovered there were a lot. It is my sincere hope that we can learn our lessons from this report and the many others that other parliamentary committees have done, because we know other shocks are going to come in the future. They may be climate-related or may be from another pandemic. We do not know, but it is a very unstable place we are a living in right now. If we do not learn lessons from our past, we are doomed to repeat the same mistakes. When it comes to the main theme of processing capacity, I am very proud that in our report we focused recommendations 2, 3 and 4 on the theme of processing capacity. One of the main themes was how to encourage local processing capacity to develop. I will focus my comments on the beef industry, as this area was extremely exposed and suffered terribly from COVID-19. As many who are familiar with agriculture know, two corporate entities run 85% of the beef processing capacity in Canada. They are JBS and Cargill. They have three main processing plants. In those plants, during the pandemic, workforces were decimated by COVID-19. In some cases, they were completely shut down. In other cases they had one shift out of three working. This caused a massive rolling backlog throughout the entire supply chain. In the beef industry, there are cow-calf operators, who raise calves out in the fields. There is the National Cattle Feeders Association, which takes them and overwinters them to grow them to a certain weight. Then, of course, there is the processing capacity. However, when our processing plants were knocked out of commission or severely curtailed in their ability to handle a typical workload, suddenly all of our feedlots were jam-packed full because they had nowhere to send all of these cattle. Then if we go back even further, we had a lot of ranchers who could not even get the cows off their lands. Because they were so constrained in where they could get their cattle processed, it exposed some of the very real weak links. That is why we see three recommendations in this report specifically looking at ways the federal government can step up to the plate and develop local processing capacity. We had all of our eggs in just a few baskets, and when those baskets did not operate anymore, we had no other places to put the eggs, to use a complicated agricultural metaphor. The way to address this in the future is to make sure we have processing capacity built up in our regions. Not only is it good for local economies, because they provide much-needed jobs, but it also, whenever there is going to be a future shock, allows our country to better withstand that. That is why we see recommendations on how we develop “local processing businesses and regional small-scale abattoirs”, how we can “identify strategic funding opportunities to address regional processing capacity” and also how we can increase funding to funding envelopes like the local food infrastructure fund, which could provide these services for small communities like mine, Duncan, in the Cowichan Valley. These are solid recommendations, and I am glad our committee spent a remarkable amount of time on them. Another area that I want to highlight in this report is the harmony that is needed between provincial jurisdiction and federal jurisdiction, especially in the context of processing capacity. If a person goes through a provincially mandated processing centre, they can sell within their province, but they cannot sell internationally or across provincial borders. To do that, they would need a federally inspected facility; essentially one that is inspected by the CFIA. However, I think that for an animal processed in British Columbia or Alberta, if British Columbians or Albertans are eating that and it is perfecting safe, it should be good for Canadians across every province. We were encouraging the government to work with the provinces to find ways where we could harmonize the requirements between provincially and federally regulated facilities. I also want to talk about labour, particularly about skills development. As I said in one of my earlier interventions, there is an incredible disconnect: many people in Canada do not know where our food comes from, how it is grown and how it actually arrives on our dinner plate. First, we need to educate more young people in our urban centres about the hard-working men and women who are out in agriculture doing this hard work in getting the food on our plates, and the incredibly complex system of how it gets there. I also think that for people who are coming out of high school and looking at potential career paths, a lot of them might overlook agriculture, because they have an old-fashioned, stereotypical view that usually involves a red barn and a cute tractor from the 1950s when agriculture is so much more. Twenty-first century agriculture is an incredible user of technology. We are talking about cutting-edge science in robotics, in communication with the Internet and so on. It is incredible how much innovation is going on in our agricultural sector. With that innovation and technological need, we have to fill those jobs. We need very technically specialized people to come in to operate and fix those machines and be real economic drivers for the industry. I was glad to see representatives from UFCW come before our committee. It is one of the largest unions in Canada. It represents a lot of the workers in food-processing centres, and it really does want to see the government step up to the plate to work with employers and union organizations so that there is more awareness in Canada's public school system about some of the exciting career paths that exist in agriculture. If we could start that kind of investment now, because the need for labour is so great, I think that is one of the ways we can start heading things off at the pass later on. The final thing I want to concentrate on when we are talking about food processing in Canada, and this may come as a surprise to some people, is recommendation 16, which is the recommendation that we have a grocery code of conduct, and I will explain to members why that is important. Much has been made in the news this year about the incredible corporate profiteering that has been going on in certain sectors. If we look at any sector, whether it is telecom, oil and gas, the grocery sector or banking, corporate profits over the last three years have reached unprecedented levels. In my opinion, they are the key driver of inflation that we are seeing today. This recommendation on establishing a grocery code of conduct is extremely important, because when it comes the relationship between larger grocery chains and the producers and processors who supply them, there has always been a power imbalance. We have five large grocers that control 80% of the market. When they wield that kind of market dominance, they are able to set a lot of the terms and conditions about what products get sold on their shelves. So, for a processor or producer who wants to make money, chances are they have to sell their stuff at Metro or Loblaws, and that is simply the only way they can turn a profit. There is a power imbalance there. A lot of the time, people who were supplying the foods that people find in the grocery stores found that those processors were getting dinged with hidden fees. There were fees if they supplied too much, if they supplied too little, if they were a day late, etc. There was no rhyme or reason to the fee structure, but they were powerless to fight that. That is why we see this major call for a grocery code of conduct from producers and processors.

2256 words

The Assistant Deputy Speaker (Mrs. Carol Hughes)

Nov/29/23 6:21:09 p.m.
Watch

It is my duty to interrupt the proceedings on the motion at this time. Pursuant to Standing Order 66(1), the debate on the motion is transferred under Government Orders.

30 words

Ms. Emmanuella Lambropoulos (Saint-Laurent, Lib.)

Nov/29/23 6:22:01 p.m.
Watch
Re: Bill C-322

Madam Speaker, I am thrilled to have the opportunity to rise to speak in support of Bill C-322, an act to develop a national framework to establish a school food program. It is quite similar to a bill I put forward in 2021, an act to develop a national strategy on school food security. I chose this as my PMB because, as a former teacher, I have seen first-hand how desperately a national school food program is truly needed in this country. Unfortunately, it never made it to second reading, because Parliament was dissolved. Therefore, it died on the Order Paper; however, I am really glad to see it brought back today and to be able to speak to it. This bill would mandate the Minister of Families, Children and Social Development, in consultation with the Minister of Health, provincial governments, indigenous governing bodies and other relevant stakeholders, to develop a national framework to establish a school food program. Within a year of the act coming into force, the minister must prepare a report setting out the national framework. The minister must table a report before each House of Parliament on any of the first 15 days on which the House is sitting after the report is completed. Within five years of tabling the report, the minister must undertake a review of the effectiveness of the national framework and prepare a report setting out his or her conclusions and recommendations regarding it. I would like to explain why a bill of this nature is absolutely necessary in Canada. First, our children are sent to school to learn. Nutrition plays a key role in allowing that to happen; of course, good nutrition contributes to academic achievement. Child cognitive development depends on adequate nutrition. According to Roberts et al., “Inadequate protein and energy intake in childhood is directly associated with reduced growth, and is indicative of several psychosocial problems later in life”. They continue, “Undernourished children also exhibit impaired development and decreased functional capacity”, while “Children who do not receive adequate nutrition and psychosocial stimulation are likely to underperform in school and to have poor levels of cognition and education, which are linked to low-income earnings later in life”. It is imperative for children to have access to healthy food, and we know that things are tough right now. Groceries are expensive, and the cost of living because of inflation has made it so that more and more families are having a difficult time putting food on the table. This bill would bring us closer to ensuring that our kids have access to at least one healthy meal every school day. It would ensure that our kids are not spending their school day thinking about how hungry they are or wondering when they are going to eat their next meal. Instead, they are able to focus on learning. The effect of malnutrition on learning is not the only reason Bill C-322 is a necessity in Canada. When I think back to my teaching days, I remember seeing kids eat alone or walk in the hallways alone, just kind of disappearing during the lunch hour; that was one of the toughest parts. Something we often do not think about is the shame that a child or adolescent feels when they do not have a lunch. They are afraid of attracting attention to themselves during those moments, because they do not want to answer any uncomfortable questions about why they do not have a lunch with them. They do not want their peers to know that their families cannot afford to feed them. It impacts their self-esteem and their ability to fit in. Food insecurity limits a child's ability to fully participate in social activities and in their school community, which amplifies existing feelings of social isolation related to material deprivation. No child should have to feel that way. No child should be subjected to unequal opportunities for friendships or positive social interactions. Edward Frongillo and colleagues investigated adolescents' experiences of shame related to food insecurity using an ethnically diverse sample of 40 adolescents aged nine to 15 years old. Participants described feelings of sadness, anger and internalized shame, and among the situations that brought out these feelings, the most common were social encounters at school among peers. This feeling of shame often leads to increased mental health challenges, including anxiety, depression and even suicidal ideation. That is why this bill is so important: It would give the government the opportunity to work with provincial governments, indigenous governing bodies and other stakeholders to develop the best possible framework to put in place. If done properly, this framework would not single out food-insecure children. It would offer all kids one healthy meal per day in order to make schools more inclusive. According to Chloe Pineau and colleagues, “Numerous studies have documented the shame, stigma, embarrassment, and social isolation associated with the use of charitable food programs...”. Therefore, it would be best if we could find a way for all children to benefit from receiving a healthy meal at school, to level the playing field. I would like to share one particular memory that I have from my teaching days that has stayed with me ever since. I was teaching secondary 1, 2 and 3 students at an English high school in Montreal. One day early in December, I was on hall duty. I had to spend the lunch hour supervising a certain hallway in the school. One of my sweetest secondary 1 students, a seventh-grade student, who always sat in the front of the class, always smiled and behaved in the most polite way, was walking toward me. She looked like she was not in a rush to go anywhere in particular. The rest of her classmates were in the cafeteria at the other end of the school. I saw that she was empty-handed and I asked her where her lunch was. To the question, she responded that she did not have a lunch because her parents were saving the food for the Christmas holidays. The Christmas holidays were still a couple of weeks away. I told her to go to the office because the office had food to give to students who were in this kind of situation. I told her that they give snacks to students who forgot their lunch or who did not have any lunch. She was reluctant to go and ask for food and actually said, “No, Miss, I'm okay.” Of course, I brought her with me and assured her that it was okay and that this happens to many kids. I also explained the situation to the office staff so that they would set something up for the next couple of weeks. However, most kids do not get caught. Most kids are really good at hiding when they do not have a lunch to bring with them to school. On the way back to my classroom, I thought back to whether there were any signs that I could have picked up on. I thought about her grades and realized that she did receive a few failing grades. I had not understood why because she was not coded and she always seemed like she was paying attention. This was a student I taught back in 2016. I can only imagine how many kids are in that same situation today, if not worse. The current economic context has increased the need for school food programs in Canada. Nearly two million people, including more employed people than ever, used food banks in March 2023 alone, which is a 32% increase from that same month one year prior. One in four Canadian children live in households that experience food insecurity. Not only is a school food program the right thing to do; it is the smart thing to do. According to research conducted in countries similar to Canada, every dollar invested in school food yields an estimated social return of $2 to $6. This is the reason I will be supporting Bill C-322.

1361 words

Mrs. Tracy Gray (Kelowna—Lake Country, CPC)

Nov/29/23 6:30:48 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, it is always an honour to rise on behalf of constituents from Kelowna—Lake Country. Today I rise to speak to the Liberal private member's bill before us. Canadians are struggling to heat their homes, to find affordable places to live and to feed themselves and their families. After eight years of the NDP-Liberal government, residents in my community and other Canadians cannot even provide basic necessities for their families. Many families are finding themselves in this situation. More children are not able to access nutritious food, and more of their parents are relying on food banks. Food bank usage hit another record high in 2023, with two million people using a food bank in one month. Canada's largest city, Toronto, just reported that one in 10 people relies on a food bank. Usage is up over 30% in my community. This is a crisis and a result of government policy failures. The idea that children are missing meals because families can no longer afford to buy food is heartbreaking. However, the legislation would not address the causes. The only thing it calls for is for ministers to do reports and reviews, all of which we would not see for years down the line. We need to focus on stopping the crushing inflation and cost increases to families. The NDP-Liberal government continues to create legislation and policies that are driving up the cost of everything. Its inflationary spending has driven up inflation, which has driven up interest rates. The facts are that after eight years of the NDP-Liberal government, higher taxes and increased red tape and bureaucracy have driven investment away. This has Canada sliding further down each year, with a continued low Canadian dollar, making anything bought from our largest trading partner, the U.S., more expensive and putting Canada on track to be one of the most unproductive and least prosperous OECD countries. The International Monetary Fund listed Canada as having the sixth-worst misery index score out of 35 industrialized countries. Simply put, the higher the score, the worse the economic situation and quality of life. Canada's score is the sixth-highest. However, the Liberals do not want to be talking about any of this. They want to make it appear like they are helping, even though they are the cause of high prices and people's misery. It is like walking along and being tripped by someone, and while looking up at them, they hold out their hand and say, “I am here for you; let me help you up.” Meanwhile, the person on the ground is lying there thinking, “I would not be lying here if you had not tripped me in the first place.” The truth is that the proposed legislation would do nothing to address the rising cost of groceries through inflationary spending and increasing carbon taxes that increase the cost of fuel. The bill would bring more government and more bureaucracy. It would be more government studies and more government reports. If we look back, we can remember that the Liberals campaigned on this bill in 2021. Now, two years later, the Liberals want to make it seem like they have not broken yet another one of their promises. The legislation is not even from the government; it is a private member's bill to think about enacting legislation. In reality, the bill is a placeholder. Even if the bill had any substance to it, the effects would not be felt anytime soon, and, again, it would do nothing to mitigate the causes. The bill is about creating reports. Not-for-profits are the ones doing the work serving communities now. We must do more to fight food price inflation by the federal government's stopping the spending. Children need and deserve proper access to nutritious food at every meal. According to Dalhousie University's Agri-Food Analytics Lab, a new survey showed that almost half of Canadians are purchasing less protein for their meals and that over 45% of people are prioritizing saving on costs by skipping out on nutritious meals for themselves and their families. The Prime Minister said that Conservatives are exaggerating how bad people's personal financial situations are, but in B.C. alone, over 66% of people are worried that their health may be compromised in the long run. A resident in my community even told me that because food prices are so high, she was praying that her garden would be able to provide enough food for her household with four teenagers. People have been left to pray. I spoke with a resident from my community who said she works with seniors and some of them are so undernourished, they actually look forward to being admitted to the hospital so they can be provided with some nourishment. This is the Canada of the NDP-Liberal government and its decisions after eight years. It is nothing short of shocking, how they are affecting people. There are things we can do now: First, we can axe carbon tax 1 and carbon tax 2 outright across Canada. Second, we can stop the inflationary spending, which is also increasing interest rates. Third, we can stop the red tape and bureaucracy that is holding back investment, making Canada uncompetitive and unproductive, which is increasing Canada's misery index. There are record-breaking lineups outside food banks and people who cannot afford to house themselves are living on the street. For the first time, there are working middle-class people living in their cars. In my home province of British Columbia and in my community of Kelowna—Lake Country, one of our local food banks just said a 91-year-old came in as a client for the first time in her life. There is a food bank now for students at the University of British Columbia, Okanagan. Our two community food banks and the many not-for-profit agencies are helping to feed families with young children, seniors and our most vulnerable. In Victoria, some food banks are seeing monthly increases by the hundreds. In Vancouver, one food bank has registered nearly 2,000 clients since July. This is what happens when they tax the farmer who makes the food, then the trucker who transports it and then the parent who buys it. A resident in my community of Kelowna reached out to me because the taxes on his gas bill were actually higher than his total gas usage cost for the month. That puts pressure on other home expenses like food. Inflationary deficit spending is driving up inflation, which is driving up interest rates. Housing prices have doubled over the last eight years. Rents have doubled over the last eight years. What the Liberals are doing is not working. This private member's bill today from a Liberal is, in fact, an acknowledgement that Liberal policies simply are not working. Across the country, Canadians are realizing that the NDP-Liberal government is simply not worth the cost. Feeding our children is important and I know all of us in this house want to make sure every child is fed. We need to scrap the NDP-Liberal carbon tax, stop policies that mean increasing costs for farmers, and stop policies that will make food packaging more expensive. We need to bring down the spending, which will also bring down inflation so that parents can afford to buy food. Only Conservatives would stop the inflationary spending to bring inflation down so that Canadians can bring home lower interest rates and afford to live. We would reduce taxes to bring down inflation and make paycheques go farther. This placeholder bill would do nothing to stop the causes of why families are struggling to feed themselves. It is actually an acknowledgement that the policies of the government are not working. We must fight for our families and children, and their well-being. This means fighting government bureaucracy and red tape, and fighting to stop the root causes of the misery of residents in Kelowna—Lake Country and across the country. It means fighting the costly carbon tax and inflationary spending that the NDP-Liberal government continues to pile onto Canadians, increasing prices and their misery.

1386 words

Ms. Marie-Hélène Gaudreau (Laurentides—Labelle, BQ)

Nov/29/23 6:40:22 p.m.
Watch
Re: Bill C-322

I rise this evening to speak to Bill C-322, an act to develop a national framework to establish a school food program. Obviously, no one can oppose virtue. Of course, I am moved by this issue, which is crucial for all young people. I work alongside a specialist in educational success, the member for Rivière-des-Mille-Îles. It goes without saying that educational success goes hand in hand with having a full belly. That is key. There are many local initiatives. We are blessed in Quebec, that much is true. Everywhere, in every region, people fight tooth and nail to provide meals for students in schools. I am the daughter of a school principal and a teacher. As an aside, I would like to say hello to my mother, Françoise Lajeunesse, who is likely watching. I have seen and heard stories of children who arrive at school every morning with empty tummies. I myself have helped many children, foundations and organizations in my region that offer meals to young people. Some of these kids have not eaten since last night. Some did not even eat last night. Some get cranky in the afternoon, not because they are stressed, but because they are hungry and have a headache. How can they succeed? This situation has to end sooner rather than later. It is a disgrace. Is that acceptable in a G7 country? That is totally incomprehensible to me. Then again, there are places where people have chosen to make a change. In Wales, thanks to the Universal Primary Free School Meals program, by 2024, all children in elementary school will be entitled to a meal at school. The Welsh government implemented this new public policy to address child poverty and ensure that no Welsh children have to go to school on an empty stomach. The program guidelines can be found on the Welsh government's website, and we could draw inspiration from them. The aim is to promote healthy eating, increase the variety of food that children eat, improve social skills at meal times, and improve behaviour and academic achievements. These are the basics of life. In France, school canteens have been feeding all French children for decades. For school-aged children, food is essential to their growth, psychomotor development and ability to learn. It must be balanced, varied and spread throughout the day: for example, 20% of total energy in the morning, 40% at the midday meal [what we call lunch], 10% at 4 p.m. and 30% in the evening. Meal time is an opportunity for students to relax and connect with one another. It should also be a special time for discovery and enjoyment. The quote I just read is from the website of France's ministry of national education and youth. It expresses my thoughts on this issue very well. Although Quebec does not yet have a universal school food program, it has had a food policy in place in early childhood centres for 25 years.

508 words

The Assistant Deputy Speaker (Mrs. Carol Hughes)

Nov/29/23 6:45:30 p.m.
Watch

I must interrupt the hon. member for a moment. It is rather noisy right now. I am going to ask someone to go and see what is going on. Perhaps we should close the lobby doors, if that is where the noise is coming from. The situation is now resolved. The hon. member for Laurentides—Labelle.

57 words

Ms. Marie-Hélène Gaudreau

Nov/29/23 6:46:05 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, I agree, it was getting a little hard to concentrate, especially because we are discussing something that is tough on our young people. I was talking about early childhood centres having a program to ensure that children have full tummies and are able to learn so that they can succeed in school and have prosperous futures. We are well aware that early childhood development requires that we teach children about healthy habits and things like that, but also that we encourage their physical and cognitive development. That said, there is still an elephant in the room. Creating this kind of plan merely extends Ottawa's reach into areas outside its jurisdiction. Education is a provincial responsibility. It is up to Quebec to decide what course it chooses to follow in this area. It is not for Ottawa to dictate yet another national framework on a topic that I am sure is quite meaningful to the member for Acadie—Bathurst. This framework must not go ahead, at least, not in its current form. Otherwise, it would be a case of interference. In August, on Radio‑Canada, Quebec's education minister said that the department of education had already injected $50 million into its programs to help the neediest children. I admit that there is room for improvement, and I think I have made it clear today how much of a priority this is for our young people. However, the method being used is not the right one. Ottawa has to stop presenting itself as a champion of progressive policies at the expense of constitutional laws. Why not champion both at once? I know that the federal government is aware of the social crisis, the housing crisis, the inflation crisis, the food bank crisis, and the fact that families are being forced to make truly heart-wrenching decisions. When a parent, a mother, wonders whether they should pay the rent or mortgage, which they may be late on, or pay for groceries, how do they feel? Thousands of people are in that situation. Honestly, it really makes me upset. It breaks my heart. If the Liberal members want to develop social policies, education policies or health care policies, then they should get elected to the provincial legislatures. That is where that stuff happens. The House of Commons is not the right place. It is at the National Assembly of Quebec that Quebec's MNAs debate education policy. It is section 93 of the Constitution of Canada that says so, not me. If the federal government wants to do more, how about this for an idea? If federal MPs want to make a real difference when it comes to what Quebec schoolchildren get to eat, they should pick up the phone, call Quebec City, talk to Bernard Drainville and Eric Girard and transfer that money to Quebec. Quebec is in charge of school boards, Quebec knows its own schools, and Quebec has always been in charge of its education policy. For pity's sake, let Quebec set up its policies as it sees fit. In closing, all this centralizing has to stop. I urge the federal government to be a good partner and make this crucially important issue a success at every level.

545 words

Mr. Taylor Bachrach (Skeena—Bulkley Valley, NDP)

Nov/29/23 6:50:58 p.m.
Watch
Re: Bill C-322 Bill C-212

Madam Speaker, they say that public education is the great social leveller, yet we know that kids cannot access the promise of education if they are hungry. Today, millions of kids across our country are going to school without food in their bellies. This is something we can change. The bill before us, Bill C-322, can be a part of a change toward the creation of a nationwide school food program that will provide healthy meals to kids going to school right across Canada. There are many reasons why we should pursue a national school food program. I was looking at a study from The Rockefeller Foundation showing that in the United States, the $18.7-billion investment in school meal programs provides a return on investment of $40 billion. Perhaps for some people those kinds of numbers are motivating, but I think there is a much more profound reason we need to do this: Access to healthy food for kids is a human right. Kids deserve to access the promise of education with food in their bellies. Far too many, millions of kids across our country, are not able to do so. That is why we in the NDP have long called for a national school food program. I want to particularly highlight the work of the member for Vancouver Kingsway, who tabled Bill C-212 in 2021 on a national school food program, and also our excellent critic, the member for Winnipeg Centre, who has been working tirelessly on this issue in her role as the critic for children, families and social development. Canada is not doing well when it comes to the provision of school food. Right now, Canada is the only G7 country that lacks a national school food program. Among the OECD countries, we are one of only a few countries that lack such a program. A 2017 study by UNICEF ranked us 37th out of 41 countries. These are 41 of the richest countries in the world, and we are ranked 37th when it comes to the provision of school meals. This is something we need to do much better on. Right now, the situation in Canada is a patchwork of programs that are held together by NGOs, volunteers, schools and private donors. They are working so hard to ensure that kids can have healthy meals at school, yet we know it is not meeting the need that exists in our country, despite their tireless efforts. That is why the federal government has a responsibility to come forward with a fully national school food program that meets the needs of kids. I mentioned the situation in Canada. Every province and territory has some semblance of funding for school meal programs. Unfortunately, that funding is falling far short, between three cents and 94¢ per person, per meal. I think anyone in this House who has bought food recently can say this is not nearly enough to ensure that kids are getting nutritious food at school. Right now, this is a particularly pertinent issue because we have seen the cost of food skyrocket. With the profits of the grocery giants going through the roof, more and more Canadians are struggling to put food on the table. School food programs, given the existing patchwork, are even having a hard time affording the food they need to provide the level of school meals they are currently providing, not to mention meeting the needs that exist across the country. In my home province of British Columbia, we are very fortunate that the NDP provincial government just recently announced a historic program, Feeding Futures. This is a $214-million school food program over three years. It is the largest investment in a school meal program in Canadian history. It is making a difference right across our province, with school districts now able to increase existing programs and create new programs where none existed. We need the federal government to come to the table as a partner. This bill in front of us, Bill C-322, can be a contribution in that direction. I will mention that it has taken a long time to get to this point. Of course, the Liberal Party, in 2019, committed to investing in a school food program. It did not put a dollar value to it. In 2021, we saw in the Liberal platform that the government would commit $1 billion over five years. That was two years ago. Just imagine all the kids across our country who could have been fed over the past two years if those dollars had flowed and that commitment had been made real with a budget commitment. We are hopeful that budget 2024 will include these necessary dollars so that the patchwork of programs across the country can get the funding needed to deliver more meals. This vision for a national school food program needs to be universal. It should not be just for kids who are not getting adequate food at home. It should be for all kids so that we are not stigmatizing those who come from more disadvantaged backgrounds. We know that it needs to be cost-shared with the provinces, and it should be free or low-cost for the kids participating in the programs. It also needs to support indigenous food sovereignty and local food production. Those are the characteristics I hope would be reflected in a national school food program created under the terms of the bill before us. This could make our country stronger. When we do it, we will be better for it in so many different ways. I had my eyes opened to the potential of school food programs two years ago when I visited Suwilaawks Community School in Terrace, in northwest B.C. I visited Suwilaawks with a number of people, including Sam from the Coalition for Healthy School Food, Margo from Farm to School and the principal of Suwilaawks. They showed me the school food program there, and it was tremendously impressive. I got to go into the kitchen and watch little kids lined up to get homemade soup and fry bread, which had been made by a volunteer named Janis Sharyk Fowler, who has been volunteering at the school for 12 years, and one of the indigenous support workers at the school, Colleen Morgan. She is fondly known as Grammie Colleen to the kids. She got up at seven o'clock that morning to make over 200 pieces of fry bread. Seeing the joy on the children's faces when they came into the school to get this food really brought home the potential of these programs to give kids the nutritious food they deserve so they can learn in our schools. I would be remiss if I did not also highlight the work of another tireless volunteer in the Terrace area, and that is Gurjeet Parhar. Gurjeet has been working on local food programs and food security for so long through the Kalum Community School Society. The Kalum Community School Society has been delivering a good food box and a food-share program in communities from Dease Lake and Telegraph Creek in northern B.C., all the way down to Bella Coola and over to Haida Gwaii. She has been a tireless proponent of school food programs. I want to thank her for her incredible work across the northwest. This is an idea whose time has come. It is time for us to move quickly now. There have been far too many delays in getting a national school food program up and running. We need this billion-dollar commitment over five years to hit the ground and to match the funds that are being brought forward by provinces such as my home province of British Columbia. We can improve Canada's standing among peer nations. We can get nutritious, healthy school food to kids right across our country and make our country stronger as a result. We can uphold the human rights of these kids who are going to school hungry. In a country as rich as ours, we should do no less. We should make every effort to ensure that our children and children in communities all across this nation have the school food they deserve and need to learn.

1387 words

Mr. Ben Carr (Winnipeg South Centre, Lib.)

Nov/29/23 7:00:52 p.m.
Watch
Re: Bill C-322

Madam Speaker, it is an honour to rise today and support Bill C-322, an act to develop a national framework to establish a school food program. I want to thank my colleague, the member for Acadie—Bathurst, for introducing the bill. I enjoyed a career as a teacher, a principal, a divisional principal and a coach. During that time, I had the opportunity to work with thousands of students, their families and educators from across Manitoba. I grew to understand the importance of being well fed and having nutritious options available during the school day, before it begins and when it ends. Nutritious food and its availability is important for a number of reasons for a student: energy, concentration and attention span, sense of self, and a general positive outlook each and every day. As mentioned by my colleague across the way a moment ago, Canada is the only country in the G7 without a national standard or framework on nutrition programs in schools. I want to be very clear, before moving on to some other elements of my remarks this evening, that we understand provincial jurisdiction over the vast majority of education in Canada. This bill serves as a catalyst for all levels of government to work together for the well-being of young people across the country. I understand that, as my hon. Bloc Québécois colleague said a few minutes ago, education is under provincial jurisdiction. At the same time, I think there are many examples of how collaboration among several levels of government can lead to positive policies in Canada. I think this bill is no different. This is an opportunity to work together. I want to read some words that were shared with me by Alan Campbell, a fellow Manitoban, who serves as the current president of the Canadian School Boards Association. In my brief time in Parliament thus far, I have tried my best to include the remarks of folks who live where I come from, because I believe that it is my responsibility, and our responsibility here, to reflect their voices back to Canadians through this chamber and the roles we occupy. Mr. Campbell had the following to say with respect to this bill, “Local school boards across the country are ready and willing to work with our provincial and federal governments on the creation of a national framework for a school food program. Recognizing that in many rural and urban communities across the country, existing school nutrition programs already function with direct support from local charitable organizations and school boards, there are already many highly successful models on which to build in order to rapidly create a framework for a universally accessible school food program in all schools across Canada.” He went on to say, “In Manitoba, school boards point to the long-standing success of the Child Nutrition Council of Manitoba...a charitable organization which for decades, has partnered with the Manitoba School Boards Association as well as the public and private sectors in delivery of strong and sustainable nutrition programs in many Manitoba schools. The newly elected [Premier of Manitoba] Wab Kinew [and his] government...[have] committed to working with school boards and the CNCM to expedite more food programs to more schools, and this partnership in Manitoba may well serve to [positively] inform the development of the national framework as sought out in...[this bill].” I spoke just yesterday to Premier Kinew and informed him that I would be talking about this matter in the chamber today. He simply wanted me to reiterate that the values of the Government of Manitoba are aligned with the intentions of this bill. We will be proud to work with him and his government in an effort to see it pass and to deliver for children across the country. I want to turn for a moment to the disproportionate impacts facing indigenous communities in Manitoba as they pertain to poverty. I note that a few of my colleagues here and my colleague from Winnipeg Centre would know the tragic nature of these statistics very well. The graduation rate for first nations students in Manitoba has been as low as 50% in recent years. This can be compared to the rate of roughly 95% for non-indigenous students in the public system in Manitoba. Out of the 11,000 kids in Manitoba who live in the child welfare system, 90% of them are indigenous. Therefore, key to reconciliation, key to doing our part to deal with the tragic consequences that poverty brings to communities, and as I just mentioned, disproportionately to indigenous communities in Winnipeg and in Manitoba, is that we must look towards how we can deal with nutrition. There are also many opportunities here, again key to reconciliation, to include indigenous values and perspectives as they relate to food, diet and health, and how those things are reflected in curriculum. There are ways for us to embed indigenous teachings and world views in the Healthy Food in Schools website, curricula and conversations. I have grown to admire the work of a grassroots organization called Teach For Canada, which is doing wonderful work to develop and support education on reserve in Canada's northern communities. Here is what their executive director, Ken Sanderson, offered as commentary with respect to this bill. He said, “In championing Bill C-322 and the creation of a national school food program, it's crucial to recognize the ongoing inequities faced by First Nations. ‘Teach For Canada-Gakinaamaage,’ with its mission to address educational disparities in First Nations, underscores the interconnected nature of these challenges, emphasizing the need for a localized, community-driven approach to achieving student success in the classroom. To truly commit to ending child hunger, we must prioritize community consultation and tailor our efforts to create a well-rounded learning environment that addresses the linked needs of education and nourishment. This requires a nuanced approach that considers factors like food costs, insecurity, and the need for culturally sensitive, Indigenous-informed nutrition.” My former employer, the Winnipeg School Division, where I got my start as a teacher some years ago, is the largest school division in the city of Winnipeg and, indeed, in the province of Manitoba. Many of its schools are located in my riding, and many of the staff who work in them reside there. The Winnipeg School Division continues to provide nutrition programs throughout its 79 schools, and in my riding, Gladstone School offers a robust breakfast program that ensures all learners are prepared to learn. The challenge is that most nutrition programs are supported by limited grants and the goodwill of charities. If we want to create a robust society, it is important to provide all learners, not only in the Winnipeg School Division but also all over Canada, with a targeted and sustainable source of nutritional food. In my home province of Manitoba, the government funds the Child Nutrition Council of Manitoba, which I referred to earlier, and it provides grants to schools. In 2021-22, these grants supported close to 34,000 children through 302 programs. As a principal, I used to apply for these grants on behalf of students, and they are wonderful. They provide an incredible amount of support that is desperately needed for young people; however, it is not enough. I watched the impact that these programs had on students in schools where I worked, schools where colleagues of mine worked and schools that my friends' kids went to, and it reinforced the importance of having at our disposal this type of support to make sure that kids have a positive experience in school. In closing, I will reiterate the urgency of implementing a national school food program. I hope that we will be able to find bipartisan support in this chamber for this piece of legislation. I know that there are areas in which my colleagues and I may disagree, such as about the source of inflation and what is driving the cost of living and affordability in this country, but I do think that we can agree on the importance of ensuring that these programs exist. When federal and provincial governments work together, great things can happen for Canada. We have seen this on deals ranging from child care to health transfers and efforts to combat climate change. I hope that Bill C-322 will afford us another opportunity to do just that.

1421 words

Mr. Damien Kurek (Battle River—Crowfoot, CPC)

Nov/29/23 7:11:05 p.m.
Watch
Re: Bill C-234

Madam Speaker, as always, it is an honour to stand in this place to debate the issues that are so important to Canadians. Since we are talking about an issue that deals with education, and I will get to the substance of the bill in a moment, I want to give a shout-out to a young lady from B.C. whose name is Abigail. I had a chance to have a visit with her in the hallway prior to coming into this debate, and she informed me that she plans to be Canada's second female prime minister. I send a big shout-out to Abigail, a very bright young lady in elementary school. It just speaks to the incredible potential that exists across this country in our young people. We are talking about one of the fundamental issues our country is facing, which is the affordability of food. There are three things I hope to be able to address in the short time I have here before us. The first is that, when it comes to the idea of a school lunch program, the idea of this sort of thing sounds great. However, as with many things that get talked about in the nation's capital, studies, reports and frameworks in this case do not feed kids. I will start by emphasizing something because our country needs real action to ensure we can address the affordability crisis so many are facing. It is leading to kids going to school hungry and families making difficult decisions about whether to pay for rent, home heating or groceries. The first point I would like to make in this debate tonight is that food has become unaffordable for so many in our country, and it should not be that way. Let me emphasize how fundamentally advantaged Canada is when it comes to being a producer of high-quality food products. We have the space, the capacity, the expertise and the experience to produce the world-class, quality food people need not only here in our own country but also around the world. Certainly it is a travesty that we are seeing approximately two million visits to food banks per month in our country when we have been blessed with such incredible capacity here at home. It is truly a tragedy. We see the underlying causes of that. The fact that we have to talk about some of the issues surrounding kids going to school hungry is absolutely tragic. However, we have before us a very simple step in the right direction. It is a bill, currently sitting in the Senate, that would address some of the challenges, and it is the common-sense Conservative bill, Bill C-234, which would remove the carbon tax on all types of farm fuels and home heating. It would allow for the price of food to be brought down in our country. It would ultimately help families, our people from coast to coast to coast, because of course our north is deeply affected by the price of food, yet the bill is unfortunately being stalled. We have to ensure that folks are able to have prosperous jobs, so we can address some of the challenges we are talking about. It has been raised several times in the debate tonight, and it is fundamentally important. In the short time I have, I will get into some of the jurisdictional challenges momentarily, but we have to acknowledge how important it is to ensure our society functions well, for civil society begins to deteriorate when people cannot afford food. The actions of left-leaning ideologies are directly forcing prices in this country to rise, and that is truly a travesty. As a fifth-generation farmer of on my family's farm in Alberta's special areas, I was discouraged today by the fact that the Prime Minister did not offer support for farmers but said he will meet with them to tell them how they should or should not do their business. Truly, it is that attitude that farmers do not need. Left-leaning ideologies need to get out of the way to let farmers grow crops and raise livestock to ensure we have that high-quality food. The second point I will make in the short time I have is that this bill is actually an admission of Liberal failure. In two of their election platforms, I believe in 2015 and 2021, the Liberals promised to have a national lunch program, yet they were unable to fulfill that. This is an admission of that failure. I would—

770 words