SoVote

Context: House Hansard - 270 - Jan/29/24

Jan/29/24 7:23:49 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, in general, I agree with the member on the issue of monopolies and oligopolies in Canada because of the lack of competition in the banking sector and the telecom sector. As the member mentioned, we are not getting a fair deal in terms of consumers. The cost of banking is high. The cellphone cost he mentioned is also high, but importantly, so are the data charges, which are becoming necessary today. Access to Internet is no longer a luxury; it is a necessity. What can we do to increase competition so the banking sector—

97 words

All Topics

The Assistant Deputy Speaker (Mrs. Carol Hughes)

Jan/29/24 7:24:27 p.m.
Watch

The hon. member has asked his question. We are out of time, but I will allow the hon. member to answer briefly. The hon. member.

25 words

Mr. Ryan Williams

Jan/29/24 7:24:35 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, it is great to hear from the other side that they are seeing what is happening here as being a travesty. I hope the member has a strong voice in his caucus to talk about this. What we need to do is increase competitors and stop the mergers; it is really important. There are three mergers we could have stopped: RBC and HSBC; Rogers and Shaw; and WestJet and Sunwing. I hope he can speak up in caucus.

80 words

All Topics

The Assistant Deputy Speaker (Mrs. Carol Hughes)

Jan/29/24 7:24:59 p.m.
Watch

It being 7:25 p.m., pursuant to order made earlier today, all questions necessary to dispose of the motion are deemed put and recorded divisions are deemed requested. Pursuant to Standing Order 66, the recorded divisions stand deferred until Wednesday, January 31, at the expiry of the time provided for Oral Questions.

54 words

All Topics

Mr. Blake Desjarlais (Edmonton Griesbach, NDP)

Jan/29/24 7:25:40 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, I am pleased to rise today to speak to a really important report that was actually tabled some time ago. I am very pleased now that the Conservatives have found time in their very busy schedules to concur in this report. It relates directly to Canada's food system. It is no secret that Canadians from coast to coast to coast right now are dealing with the reality of price-sticker shock. They are seeing that for something they would always buy, whether that is dairy products or the extra thing they get for their kid, every time they go the prices are increasing. This is a direct consequence of our country's inability, for the many decades leading to this report, to properly plan and prepare for when an emergency strikes and how it impacts our supply chains and how Canadians can get ahead of these factors. The report is good in the sense that it directly looks at the crisis that pertained to the supply chain issues that we were experiencing due to COVID-19, but is important that this report be understood as one to better prepare Canada, not just for a pandemic but for any instance where we would see a devastation to our supply chain that directly impacts the cost of goods for Canadians. Today, we spoke about the importance of looking at the root causes of some of this terrible price gouging that we are seeing in grocery stores. It is no secret that under the cover of inflation we have seen grocery stores directly profit from the crisis across the country. We are seeing this kind of profiteering manifest in record-breaking profits. When we see the record-breaking profits of some of these huge megacorporations like Loblaws or Empire or Metro, we often see it is those who are most vulnerable who suffer the greatest. As a matter of fact, Statistics Canada was clear that one in seven Canadians, which is almost 15%, are experiencing food insecurity as of May 2020. It is an increase of 10.5% from two years earlier. I hope we have some kind of common goal here among ourselves as parliamentarians and we would see this issue as a non-partisan one because all of our neighbours right now are experiencing this. Whether one is a constituent of Edmonton Griesbach, a constituent of Carleton or a constituent of Kingston and the Islands, it is true that Canadians are feeling the pinch. Canadians really expect us as parliamentarians to use the time that they so desperately do not have to do the work of ensuring they have what they need to get by. We did remark this day on the passing of Ed Broadbent, and I want to make clear my condolences to the family and to all those who served with him. However, I do also want to speak to a powerful message. So often in his time as not only a politician but also as an academic he advocated for social democracy, to increase the material benefit for Canadians to ensure that Canadians, no matter the poverty they were to experience, had a place at our democratic table. That is only possible through the important work of ensuring that our social institutions can make possible their political will. When we start to see poverty in our communities to the extent we are seeing it and when we see our food system at a place where during the time of COVID-19 it was impacted so greatly, it is up to us now to deliver on the recommendations within this report. It is up to us to ensure that we have a stronger system of preparing, so that when an emergency strikes our food system, Canadians are ready. We do not have to wait for the next emergency to happen in order to do that. We can do this work today. As a matter of fact, I would ask that we consider doing that today, given the extreme issues we are seeing of price gouging right now. It is an emergency, certainly in my mind. Canadian households with children are also more likely to experience food insecurity, which is a terrible reality I spoke to last year pertaining to the good people of Saskatchewan. While people in Saskatchewan right now are experiencing the highest costs for food, we are seeing a provincial government that is unwilling to support those people, especially when it comes to a national food program that was tabled here in this House. It is something that families and children need. Let me speak to the importance of a food program. I grew up in a very poor family in a very poor community known as the Fishing Lake Métis Settlement. There, we were provided with meals at school. I remember, for example, my mom being nervous and she would sometimes sweat, wondering, as a single parent, how she was going to help her child get food today. I would see the difficult decision in her mind as to whether she should make a car payment or she should make rent, versus feeding us. It is truly one of the most heartbreaking truths happening right now. It is one of the most heartbreaking realities families are going through as we speak. They are wondering what tomorrow is going to look like for their child and wondering if they will be in the cafeteria with their friends and be able to open a lunch or if they will spend that time in a bathroom at school because they do not have enough. Today, in light of Mr. Ed Broadbent, I want to be able to speak to my colleagues in a way that hopefully unites us. We speak oftentimes of the things that divide us in this place, but it is true that much unites us. For example, a member just spoke about monopolies and our need to break down those monopolies, and I fully agree it is now time. Subsequent to decades of Conservative and Liberal policies that have allowed megacorporations to flourish, it is time. We have the courage and the moral will to break up those companies, to increase competition and to make possible the material enhancements for those living without. Over the last decade, food insecurity rose twofold in my home province of Alberta. A new vital statistics report found that in 2011 just over 12% of Albertans were food insecure, and in 2022, that number rose more than 20%. It is heartbreaking to know that our friends and our families, the ones we all care about, are silently suffering in line at a food bank, knowing that these prices are going to continue to climb. These prices will be unchecked forever unless we have the ability to take control of both the vulnerabilities facing our food system and the challenges facing those small and medium-sized businesses, while also ensuring that those profiting off Canadians are held accountable. When we hold those companies accountable, and I speak of Loblaws, we take the immense wealth they have been able to obtain from Canadians, with record-breaking profits, and use it to ensure that those who do not have the means to survive truly get the opportunity to have a full belly. Why is that important? Why is it that in the seat of our democracy here in Canada, one of the wealthiest countries in the globe, we happen to be debating food insecurity? It is because of poor decisions. I am not here to point fingers about why we are presented with this challenge today. I hope I can find a way to unite my colleagues toward a better goal, a goal that sees the truth we all hold toward a solution we may debate. That solution will enable tens of thousands, if not millions, of Canadians to truly control their own destiny. It will allow them to participate in our democratic institutions unlike ever before. We know that Canadians living under poor socio-economic conditions are less likely to vote and are less likely to participate. What does that say for our democracy? In a time when we cannot feed those who need it most and they cannot participate, what does that end up with? It ends up with those who would seek to protect the profits of those who win elections. It is up to each and every one of us to steer clear and to know deep in our hearts the reasons we were sent here. It is up to us to hold accountable those who are the most powerful so that the vulnerable in our society truly have a voice. This is something that has been ingrained in me since I was born, something passed down from generations of indigenous people whose principles lie in the fact that we are only as strong as our weakest link. Canadians across the country are really suffering and are holding on as best they can. I know the government has the best will and intentions. However, it may not have all the best ideas, and we have been very critical of those ideas, as have our other opposition colleagues. What is needed in our country today is truly a path forward, one that would see the immense food insecurity of northerners. There are particularly dramatic, terrible and sad stories we hear from our Inuit relatives in Nunavut. We have seen some of the largest price gouging in human history taking place there for things as basic as milk. We know, for example, that there is the nutrition north food program. It is good in its intentions, and I commend the government for ensuring people have food when they can. It is a good program. The fault with the program is the fact that we do not then check up on the companies that would absorb that subsidy. We see, in fact, companies that would take a goodwill program and abuse it by increasing the prices of those goods in order to increase their profits. These are the fine details that companies that are ruining competition in our country thrive on. They thrive on the fine print that allows them to get away with it. That leads me to an important piece in regard to tax fairness. We know that some of these megacorporations are not paying their fair share. I know for certain that small and medium-sized businesses in our ridings are paying their fair share. They are doing hard work. They are trying as best they can to put food on the table while making sure they can give back to their communities. They do so by ensuring that the local parade, whether it is for Canada Day, Christmas or any other community event, is sponsored by the few thousand dollars they can take in as profit. We never get to see Loblaws in a parade. As a matter of fact, I have never seen that in my community, and I do not think it has been in anyone's community. This is to say that those who are supporting our communities need our support now more than ever. I was disappointed to see that the CEBA loans were not extended, as were my Conservative colleagues and my Bloc colleagues, and, I am sure, many of my Liberal colleagues. That is something we will have to reckon with as companies continue to default and fall behind. I want to make mention of these companies, because they are the very same companies that would end the crisis we are seeing in our food supply chain insecurities. We know that if we strengthen small and medium-sized businesses, increase competition and ensure that those who are providing for our communities truly get the benefit and the support of a government that is willing to support them and support communities, it is good policy. I really do think we can find some kind of consensus here as long as we have the political will, but we are still in a position where megacorporations continue to hide and avoid taxes. I spoke to the CRA in the public accounts committee, where this report came from, about the reality of tax evasion in the billions of dollars. We can, in fact, if we have the courage, use the funding that is being taken out of the hands and mouths of families and that is driven into the coffers of multinational corporations and put it back in the hands of communities. That could truly end the crisis we are seeing with our food supply. I will even go further. When we support those small and medium-sized businesses, local grocers, our farmers and the local production of goods, we support Canada's future. Members may recall that when this report was commissioned, there were protesters from Prince Edward Island outside this place. They were good, hard-working potato farmers who showed up every day, no matter the conditions, to make sure we had food on our tables. We saw piles and truckloads of potatoes wait there because we were unable to get and to secure export to the United States. That should not be the case. Those potatoes should be going right across this country where there are hungry families. Rather than looking for the better dollar elsewhere, we should have the courage and the moral will to ensure that Canadians, even if a dollar is not to be made, get the food they so desperately need rather than have so much of it gather in sites where it goes to waste. We need laws in this country that protect Canadians from the time a food product is produced to the time that food product is eaten. We shall not and we should not allow companies to use their purchasing power to overcome the consumer, but we are seeing that. If we do not buy the goods that they put out front, they throw them away. What a travesty and a terrible reality it is to know that in a food crisis, in a wealthy country like Canada, we throw away tonnes of food, and we allow those corporations to get away with it. New Democrats have been consistent in our approach that we need an understanding of both the wants and the needs of Canadians. We have to be clear about the wants and needs. The free market that my Conservative colleagues so often speak about should be the market of wants. If we want an Xbox, a PlayStation, a new skateboard or whatever goods we find our kids for Christmas, it should be on the free market. We should certainly ensure that there is fair competition, that those goods are on the market and that Canadian products are innovative and have a fair chance at hitting the shelves for Canadians to choose from. When it comes to the needs of Canadians, we need to be certain that in order for Canadians to actually practise their democratic rights in a political democracy, we need to guarantee their social access to the things they need: housing, food, water and dignity, things that no human should ever be deprived of. When we deprive humans of these things they need, we deprive them of the very real outcome of being able to participate in our political democracy. Political democracy is so well connected to the social outcomes of Canadians, to something as simple as food. I will warn Canadians that if we do not get a hold of the dramatically increasing prices of the things Canadians need, of water, food, housing, etc., we will begin to see a dramatic erosion of our democratic institutions. We will begin to see a great mistrust, a great apathy, a great nihilism in our future. For me, coming from very humble beginnings in rural northeast Alberta, it is a dream to be able to stand in this place. It is a dream to be able to speak to such hon. colleagues about the solutions I think could help us. It is a dream that is still alive, a dream of a better Canada, a dream that still lives on in so many hungry hands and hungry mouths today. They pray that our democracy and the institution of which we are members will come together, not just on the problems facing the country but on the solutions. I have tried my best to ensure that I speak to the very real realities of the people of Edmonton Griesbach, the realities they are facing in terms of the lack of housing, unaffordable groceries or the immense violence they face due to poverty. I also want to ensure that we can deliver, even in a position from which we may not politically benefit, and the Conservatives remind us every single day that we may not be politically salient as a party or politically salient enough to win government. I accept that. That is fine. What I trust deeply is the goodwill of Canadians. I trust deeply that they will know the kind of hope that lives in my heart, that they will know that I truly desire the kind of Canada that unites us, the kind of Canada that says no one should go without, and the kind of Canada that feeds us. This is a dream that I think all parties share. I hope they will guarantee our party the same goodwill, to know that our solutions, when we speak of dental care and ensuring there is a tax on the most wealthy banks, or when we speak of anti-scab legislation, that it comes from a place of deep respect for Canadians, a deep understanding that they, too, are hurting, and an understanding that says we will not sit idly by while conditions get worse. We can, in fact, ensure a kind of future that is morally correct, socially correct and economically correct. We can, and I believe it, so long as we speak not only of the problems but also of the solutions. Our report makes clear, and I sat with hon. colleagues from all parties to form a consensus on the report, that we must change and we must prepare Canadians for an economy and a system that protects them from what can be a devastating outcome. We must protect, first and foremost, the quality of food, the supply of food and its transport. This would ensure that we have a base to our economy that could make possible the truths I have spoken about today. I believe that when we enact the policies that we have generously put forward here, Canada will come out with a plan, a plan that would secure us for the next emergency, because it is a matter of when, not if an emergency strikes, but when. I am very honoured to stand here on behalf of the good constituents of Edmonton Griesbach in this year, 2024, and I look forward to hearing my colleagues.

3185 words

All Topics

Ms. Lianne Rood (Lambton—Kent—Middlesex, CPC)

Jan/29/24 7:45:25 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, I have to agree with my colleague; we do want to find common ground with regard to food security and making sure that Canadians can afford healthy, nutritious food. The key word is “afford”. While the member talked about record profits, one thing he did not talk about was the fact that there are record input costs for our farmers and producers in order to produce that food. There are record costs for our truckers, for their fuel to truck the food to the grocery stores. I am just wondering if my colleague could comment on why the NDP does not want to support axing the carbon tax for our farmers and producers, so that we can actually bring down the cost of food in order for Canadians to see the cost of food go down at the grocery store.

144 words

All Topics

Mr. Blake Desjarlais

Jan/29/24 7:46:17 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, I am really happy that my hon. colleague mentioned this, because it is an important question that seems simple as to its facts but is actually quite complex in terms of how the supply chain truly works. I will say this: The costs that are being borne by our farmers, the costs that are being borne by cattle producers like my family, and the costs that are being borne by the truckers who are moving the food are all increasing. That is true, and I want to thank my hon. colleague for making that clear. However, the part I hope she can hear clearly is that it is not Canadians who are benefiting from this. It is not even the government that is benefiting from this. It is the megacorporations that, at the time of input increase, increased not only the base cost of goods but also the profit margin of those goods. That is the definition of “profiteering”. We used to be a country that, in the face of profiteering, would clamp down on it. We only need to look at World War II to see how Canadians used competition to ensure a fair price. We used government apparatus to ensure consumer fairness. My answer to my hon. colleague is that although I agree with the premise that, of course, these things are going up, the solution to remove the carbon tax, which is about four cents on one hundred dollars' worth of groceries, will not do the dramatic reduction of the cost of goods that we need. What we need is true competition in the megacorporations. We need to break them up and limit the profit motive at some reasonable degree. It cannot be infinite. I do appreciate the question, and the solution, of course. If four cents is something that is valuable to the member, then sure, but I am more interested in ensuring that our system of economy produces a system that is fair, to guarantee consumer power, rather than ram it over.

341 words

All Topics

Mrs. Brenda Shanahan (Châteauguay—Lacolle, Lib.)

Jan/29/24 7:48:19 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, my hon. colleague, with whom I sit on the public accounts committee, gave a passionate speech. He certainly brings more passion to public accounts than normally we see, and that is greatly appreciated. Coming back to the report itself, the Auditor General and the committee itself, we heard testimony from different government departments and so on about the concerns that the Auditor General had about securing the food system around a comprehensive plan, as well as inconsistencies in data collection and measures. Of course, it is not just the federal government that is responsible here but also the provinces and territories. It even goes down to the municipal and community level. I would like to hear my colleague comment on what we heard.

125 words

Mr. Blake Desjarlais

Jan/29/24 7:49:15 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, it is true that both municipalities and provincial governments do bear responsibility. Actually, part of the report's critical recommendations was to look at ways the federal government could look at provincial partners in particular, but there were some municipal examples, for big cities in particular. Members may recall that there was a national emergency facing us during the same time as we were hearing this. That was the dramatic infrastructure devastation we saw in British Columbia brought on by floods as a result of climate change. Floods, of course, produce extreme changes, not only in the existing water table that is present in British Columbia but also in the output costs of very good products we make there, like wine products and other agricultural goods in British Columbia. That is an example in which we see a solution in asking for a framework to work with provinces so that at a time of an emergency like that, we open up corridors of transport. That is one of the recommendations I agree with, to ensure that we actually get goods from one province to the other. If members can bear with me, I will add this. It is a true fact that at the time of the huge floods in British Columbia, which I know many families are still bearing grief for, it was actually companies that came forward to redirect the supply of goods from the northern corridor that supplied access to Alberta. My home province would have been cut off without such goodwill from CN and the people who allowed us to do that. We need to go further than that. We cannot just wait and bet on the goodwill of our neighbours and those actors in our country. We need to be more proactive. The solution found in this report is to look at our framework, to recommend to the provinces and the federal government that we come together on such a strategy, because it is true: We do not bear all of the jurisdictional powers at the federal level that would make possible the emergency levers to relieve a situation like a supply chain crunch.

361 words

Mr. Richard Lehoux (Beauce, CPC)

Jan/29/24 7:51:18 p.m.
Watch
Re: Bill C-234

Mr. Speaker, first of all, I would like to say that I will be sharing my time with my colleague from Lambton—Kent—Middlesex. I am very honoured to rise today in the House to represent the people of my riding, Beauce, and also, more importantly, on the issue of Canada's food security and sovereignty. After studying the 14th report of the Standing Committee on Public Accounts, all of my thoughts on the matter have unfortunately been confirmed. I will take a brief moment to read the conclusion of the report: ...there was no national emergency preparedness and response plan for Canada's food system and food security, despite the government having identified food as a critical infrastructure sector long before the COVID-19 pandemic began. And although AAFC had two emergency plans in place, it acknowledged that they were insufficient to deal with a crisis of this magnitude. When I read the recommendations in this report, I see that these are watered down recommendations to mask the current government's failures. In every recommendation, the Standing Committee on Public Accounts asks the departments concerned for status reports. However, in my opinion, it does not really go far enough. As Conservatives, we have been defending farmers and families from the beginning. We understand that food security starts on the farm and that our government needs to be there to support those who put food on our tables. Under this Liberal government, the price of food has skyrocketed because of the carbon tax. Farmers are finding it harder and harder to make ends meet. Canadians, too, are finding it harder and harder to put food on the table, as we have seen from the record use of food banks in our communities. We have also seen a decline in our relationships with many countries, since the government has failed many times in the negotiation of trade agreements. Some countries do not even want to reopen negotiations with us because of the government's incompetence. That is why it is so important to have a national food system that works and that we can depend on today and in the future. It is very simple. With grocery prices the highest they have ever been in our country, it is up to this government to find a way to reduce the cost of food. The easiest place to start is on the farm. A great way to start would be to pass the original Bill C-234 as soon as possible so as to exempt farmers from the carbon tax on propane and natural gas used to heat livestock buildings and dry grain. I am appalled that the Prime Minister and his senators gutted this important bill in the Senate. The bill had the unanimous support of all parties in the House but one, the Liberal Party of Canada. This legislation also had the backing of every ag sector stakeholder I talked to across the country. These farmers need relief from this crippling tax that is destroying their businesses and driving food prices sky-high. I talked to lots of farmers in my riding, and every one of them endorsed this bill. Winter is here, and they are very worried about how they are going to heat their henhouses and hog barns all winter long. As the official opposition agriculture critic and as a member of the Standing Committee on Agriculture and Agri-Food, I have personally attended every meeting since I was elected. We hear the same stories year after year. Over the holidays, I volunteered at Moisson Beauce, a food bank in my riding. While preparing Christmas hampers for struggling families, about 2,500 in a single day, I learned that Moisson Beauce is now experiencing record usage and no longer receives enough donations to meet demand. That is not the Canada I remember. We are at a point where it is cheaper to import food than to produce it locally. One comment I hear all too often from the Liberals and the Bloc Québécois is that the carbon tax does not apply in Quebec. That is absolutely false. The carbon tax applies in Quebec directly and indirectly. I can show countless receipts from farmers for propane, for example, that include the federal price on pollution. As I was saying, the carbon tax is also paid indirectly when we import goods from other provinces. Quebec is not self-sufficient; we import a lot of products from provinces that pay the entire carbon tax and that tax is passed on to us, the consumers, either through inflated prices or the cost of transportation. Agriculture Carbon Alliance wrote to every federal member to express their full support for this bill. The alliance is 17 national agricultural groups representing more than 190,000 farms in Canada. Canadian farmers are stewards of the land. They are very concerned about their animals and the environment. They work so hard to feed our families and support our economy. The lack of support from the Liberal government is incredible. I must mention the rural members of the Liberal caucus. I cannot believe that only three Liberals voted in favour of this legislation. I suppose that only three of them want to keep their seat in the next election. The polls speak for themselves. Who could forget what the Minister of Rural Economic Development said? She said that, if Canadians want relief, they should elect more Liberal members. If those rural Liberal members think they will ever get the farm vote back, they are sorely mistaken. Another looming problem that will impact Canada's food security and food sovereignty is the Liberal plan to outlaw single-use plastics, a plan that the courts recently struck down but that the government plans to appeal at taxpayers' expense. A study by the Canadian Produce Marketing Association makes it clear that if this ban goes through, fruit and vegetable prices will rise by up to 34%. The report also indicates that the availability of Canadian products could be reduced by half. We will also see a 50% increase in food waste. Conservatives will always stand up for farmers and, most importantly, for common sense. Canadians are suffering. Many of them are on the verge of bankruptcy. How can the government turn its back on them when all they want is to feed their families affordably? If the government does not take action, our farm families will keep disappearing, our country will become even more dependent on food imports, and our food system will be even more vulnerable. Right now, a vegetable grown in Mexico costs less at the grocery store than one grown locally. Does that make sense? It is contrary to their entire climate change ideology. Canadians can count on the Conservatives to change that situation, which makes no sense. Canadians do not need departmental progress reports. They need real action to avert a disaster in our national food system. With out-of-control inflation and interest rates that are still very high, Canadians will continue to experience financial difficulties. This report sheds light on the situation and shows that it is extremely important that we learn from the pandemic and take the appropriate action. The Prime Minister has increased the size of the public service by 40% since he has been in office, so how is it that these departments cannot manage to do their work properly? That is incompetence. At the end of her speech, my colleague from Lambton—Kent—Middlesex will move a motion to get our national food system back on track in order to guarantee our food security and food sovereignty in the future. I sincerely hope that my colleagues will take this issue seriously and that we can come together to do the right thing for all Canadians by voting in favour of this motion.

1319 words

All Topics

Ms. Lianne Rood (Lambton—Kent—Middlesex, CPC)

Jan/29/24 8:01:03 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, I enjoy working with my colleague on the agriculture committee as Conservatives continue to stand up for our agriculture sector. My colleague is from Quebec, which is also another big area for growing produce. He talked in his speech about a plastics ban that the Liberal government has proposed. I am wondering whether my colleague could elaborate on how the single-use plastics ban would affect consumers at the grocery store if the ban were to go through on plastics for produce and meat in grocery stores.

89 words

All Topics

Mr. Richard Lehoux

Jan/29/24 8:01:48 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, this new regulation on single-use plastics will indeed have a very significant and negative impact on Quebec consumers. We know that our produce growers need these products to preserve their produce, and God knows that our produce growers were very hard hit by flooding in the regions in 2023. It is very important that we think about this issue, because right now, we do not have a solution to protect produce while still putting high-quality products on grocery shelves. We also owe that to consumers.

89 words

All Topics

Ms. Lianne Rood (Lambton—Kent—Middlesex, CPC)

Jan/29/24 8:02:59 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to talk about the report from the public accounts committee entitled “Protecting Canada's Food System During the COVID-19 Pandemic”. In this report, we learn that the NDP-Liberal government spent $515 million, more than half a billion dollars, in various funding envelopes “increased risk of food insecurity”. This is the key question: How much food security did Canadians get for more than half a billion dollars? Well, the short answer is that Canadians got less, not more, food security. They are getting less, thanks to policies of the NDP-Liberal government, which continue to increase food production costs, food transportation costs, food spoilage and food prices and reduce food supply, food variety, food freshness and food security. First, I ask members to cast their mind back to the pandemic. During the NDP-Liberal COVID lockdowns, despite Conservatives sending a warning, along with Canadian producers, processors and suppliers, the NDP-Liberal government failed miserably to plan ahead. It had no plan for getting temporary foreign workers nor seasonal agriculture workers in and out of Canada when and where they were needed. There was no plan for bringing workers into Canada for greenhouse producers starting in January 2021 nor for field producers throughout their planting and harvesting seasons. At the end of the season, some farmers were even faced with the challenges of workers who were not able to return to their home country, for example, Trinidad and Tobago, and there was little or no diplomatic help available for those Canadian producers. That was an epic fail thanks to the NDP-Liberal governing party. Sadly, it does not end there. For the past two years or more, food prices have increased by 8%, 9% or more year over year. Vegetables are seeing the biggest price increases. As a result, Canadian families are cutting back on purchases of vegetables and other healthy foods for their children, and about 20% of Canadians are reporting skipping a meal each day. Food banks across the country are seeing record numbers of visits by Canadians to the tune of over two million families. This is the very definition of food insecurity. The costly coalition of NDP-Liberals has been sleeping at the wheel as Canadian families pay more and more for the necessities of life. With the carbon tax one and carbon tax two combined by April Fool's Day 2030, the Prime Minister and his NDP-Liberal government want to charge Canadian farmers and truckers 61¢ for every litre of fuel they put in their farm implements and trucks in carbon tax. It is not rocket science. It is basic math that the NDP-Liberals just do not seem to get. If it costs more to grow food and it costs more to ship food, it is going to cost Canadian families more to buy food. The Governor of the Bank of Canada, Tiff Macklem, said that the carbon tax announcements that have it going up, that increases inflation each year. The lead author of Canada's Food Price Report 2023, Dr. Sylvain Charlebois, has pointed out that the carbon tax has made business expenses go up. Up and down the food chain, Dr. Charlebois points to a “compounding effect” as the supply chain is exposed to increased costs from the carbon tax. Again, if it costs the farmer more to grow food and truckers more to ship food, it is going to cost Canadians more to buy food. How do we solve the problem of rising food prices and this Prime Minister's costly coalition? Well, first things first, we need to axe the carbon tax. The leader of the opposition and those of us on this side of the House want to offer Canadian families relief from the carbon tax. We want to put an end to possibly the most out-of-touch-with-reality, regressive, punitive and unfair tax Canadians have been asked to pay. However, there is more. The Minister of Environment and Climate Change has added plastic to the list of toxic substances. Yes, members heard that right. Plastic is a toxic substance according to the environment minister. Although the courts recently struck down the NDP-Liberal government's single-use plastics ban, the environment minister has another evil trick up his sleeve. Last August 1, the environment minister issued a notice for his proposed ban on primary plastic packaging, meaning the packaging for produce and meats that we see in the grocery stores. At meetings of the agriculture committee on December 7 and 11, 2023, I asked the chief executive officers of Walmart Canada, Loblaw and Metro what the impact would be for them and their customers if this ban were to be implemented. The CEOs of both Loblaw and Metro said that, if the NDP-Liberal government proceeded with a ban on primary food packaging, it would increase food costs by approximately $6 billion a year, severely impair competition, threaten the availability of food and increase spoilage, meaning more food waste. Primary plastic packaging serves as a hygienic barrier to contaminants; it delays spoilage, extends best before dates, reduces waste and optimizes perishables' nutritional value. Plastic packaging is lightweight, and it reduces the amount of fuel used in transport compared with other alternatives. What most consumers do not realize is that the job that plastic does for fresh fruit and vegetables is done long before it ever hits the grocery store shelves. According to the Canadian Chamber of Commerce, on average, Canadians spend about $1 billion per month on fruit and vegetables. Only about 12.5% of the fruits and vegetables Canadians consume are produced in Canada. Canadians consume seven times as much imported fruit and vegetables as domestically produced fruit and vegetables. I am sure part of that is because of our weather patterns here. Imported produce can take weeks to reach us by ship. Plastic packaging plays a crucial role in keeping food from overripening and spoiling before it gets to Canada. At this time, there is no cost-effective alternative solution to plastic packaging that is available on a global scale. If the NDP-Liberal government were really and truly concerned about food costs and food security, one might think that it would conduct a regulatory impact analysis. However, one would be wrong. At the agriculture committee on November 30, 2023, I asked the deputy agriculture minister if a regulatory impact analysis on a primary plastic packaging ban for produce had been done. She testified that it had not. This is irresponsible. The Canadian Produce Marketing Association, or CPMA, did a regulatory impact analysis of the proposed primary plastic packaging ban. It found that the NDP-Liberal environment minister's ban on primary plastic packaging could increase the cost of fresh produce by 34%. It could also reduce the availability of fresh produce for Canadians by more than 50%, including the near total elimination of all value-added products, reducing market value by approximately $5.6 billion. The ban could increase fresh produce waste by more than 50%. Furthermore, it could increase the production and release of greenhouse gases from the produce supply chain by more than 50%. The environment minister should take note. Another finding from the CPMA impact analysis suggests that increased fresh produce costs will lead to reduced availability and reduced consumption, therefore increasing health costs by over $1 billion each year. Furthermore, the ban will have a disproportionate impact on the cost and availability of fresh produce in rural and remote regions of Canada. When presented with the consequences of the NDP-Liberal environment minister's ban, almost two-thirds of Canadian consumers expressed concern. Finally, the Canadian Produce Marketing Association's regulatory impact analysis reported that the proposed regulations will lead to an increased risk of food safety incidents and food-borne illnesses. In short, the NDP-Liberal environment minister is painting a target on the back of every single Canadian with the threat posed to their health and well-being by his ill-advised, non-evidence-based, irresponsible ban on primary plastic packaging. As I conclude, I want to move: That the motion be amended by deleting all the words after the word “That” and substituting the following: “the 14th report of the Standing Committee on Public Accounts, presented on Tuesday, May 17, 2022, be not now concurred in, but that it be recommitted to the Standing Committee on Public Accounts for further consideration, with a view to recommend that the agriculture sector be exempt from any federal carbon tax in order to maintain food-security and preparedness for future emergencies.” It is always an honour to rise here on behalf of the people I represent in Lambton—Kent—Middlesex and the farmers and producers who produce the great-quality food that we feed Canadians. I want to thank them for what they do.

1494 words

All Topics

The Deputy Speaker

Jan/29/24 8:13:36 p.m.
Watch

The amendment is in order. Questions and comments, the hon. member for Milton. I also want to wish the member a happy birthday today.

24 words

All Topics

Mr. Adam van Koeverden (Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Environment and Climate Change and to the Minister of Sport and Physical Activity, Lib.)

Jan/29/24 8:14:27 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, thank you for wishing me a happy birthday as I stand for the first time in the House in 2024. I know my hon. colleague and friend on the other side has spent many years of her life feeding Canadians, so on behalf of Canadians who enjoy potatoes, I would like to say thanks. My family is from a similar region. The Dutch side of my family settled in southwestern Ontario and farmed apples, among other things. As we have discussed, farming is close to my heart as well. It is important as well to talk about some of the quotes that the member used. I am a bit concerned, occasionally, about the selective use of facts, but I think everybody in this House is guilty of reading the things we agree with more commonly than the things we disagree with. However, Sylvain Charlebois is somebody I am familiar with. I follow him and I read what he writes, and in the most recent “Food Price Report”, he was actually a bit more ambiguous with respect to carbon pricing than the member let on. His exact quote was actually “Suggesting that carbon pricing has a direct, linear effect on retail food prices would be misleading.” He also went on say that there are many factors, like climate change, that have a much larger impact on the price of food. I would like to ask the hon. member, as a potato farmer, what impact climate change events like extreme weather, drought, floods and erratic precipitation are having on potato yields, because last year Canada's wheat yields were at an all-time low due to those climate change factors.

284 words

All Topics

Ms. Lianne Rood

Jan/29/24 8:16:06 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, I will take the opportunity to wish my colleague a happy birthday as well. As my colleague said, yes, I have spent years of my life in food production. In fact, we heard from one of my colleagues on this side of the House today and from many farmers in my area this year that they have actually had a bumper crop. They have had higher yields than they have seen in years with some of their crops. Yes, the carbon tax does affect the cost of food. As my colleague pointed out, we may agree to disagree with some of the references we hear, but on an overall scale, as a producer, I know first-hand that my input costs have gone up. If my input costs are going up, if the fuel is going up and everything is going up, I have to increase the price of the produce that I am selling to wholesalers. My costs increase, and therefore I have to pass those costs on to those who buy from me. As wholesalers, they have to make a profit as well, so they have to pass those costs on to the retailers that they sell their product to, and of course the retailers, because they are paying more now for the product, have to increase their prices to consumers. Therefore, I disagree with the premise that the carbon tax does not have an effect on the cost of food, because first-hand knowledge tells me that it absolutely does.

255 words

All Topics

Ms. Laurel Collins (Victoria, NDP)

Jan/29/24 8:17:32 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, I would like to repeat the question that was just asked, because I did not hear an answer. The question asked about the impact of the climate crisis on farmers, on the cost of food and on families.

40 words

Ms. Lianne Rood

Jan/29/24 8:17:48 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, again, this year we have seen record yields. I can say that in our harvest in the last crop year, I have seen record yields. In the 50 years that my father farmed, and my grandparents before my father, and in my 45 years of life, I have been through years when we have had droughts, when we have had floods, when we have had record crops and when we have had not so good crops. Farmers are the biggest risk-takers I have ever met in my life. It is a gamble every year. They put something in the ground and pray and hope that Mother Nature is going to bring good weather so they can have an abundant harvest to make a good living. Unfortunately, all the costs that we see, including the carbon tax, are not making farmers profitable, and if farmers are not profitable, they are not going to stay in business. That is going to mean for Canadians that food security is going to be in jeopardy, and not just food security, but food sovereignty. The Liberal government and my colleague with the NDP need to stop propping up the Liberal government and actually support farmers and support axing the carbon tax for our agricultural producers.

213 words

Mr. Garnett Genuis (Sherwood Park—Fort Saskatchewan, CPC)

Jan/29/24 8:19:03 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, the carbon tax is driving inflation. The carbon tax hits the farmer who grows the food, the trucker who transports the food, the grocer who sells the food and the family who buys the food. The member across the way gets it, because he has heard it so many times. He is chuckling and throwing it across the floor, but if the member for Kingston and the Islands knows so well that the carbon tax is hitting the farmer, the trucker, the grocer and the family, then why will he not change his position and vote with us to relieve struggling Canadian families and axe the tax?

109 words

Ms. Lianne Rood

Jan/29/24 8:20:11 p.m.
Watch
Re: Bill C-234

Mr. Speaker, I will say to Canadians that Conservatives on this side of the House will vote to axe the tax. We are calling on the House right now to send Bill C-234 back to the Senate in its original form so we can give producers and farmers a break on the carbon tax so their input costs go down and Canadian families can pay less at the grocery store.

71 words

All Topics