- Member of Parliament
- Parliamentary Secretary to the Leader of the Government in the House of Commons
- Liberal
- Winnipeg North
- Manitoba
- Voting Attendance: 64%
- Expenses Last Quarter: $110,821.77
- Government Page
- Jun/17/24 8:52:27 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, we have a great respect for the fine work that our farmers do day in and day out, 365 days a year. Let there be no doubt about that, whether they are addressing the needs created in drought situations or promoting trade.
Earlier this year, I was with the Minister of Agriculture when we opened up one of the greatest economic opportunities for the future of agri-foods by opening up an office in Manila, a trade office for 40 Asian countries. I wonder if the member would recognize that we not only have budget measures to support farmers but also other initiatives. Does the member support the Indo-Pacific Agriculture and Agri-Food Office opening in Manila?
120 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Jun/4/24 3:28:26 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, this is one of the reasons to have a grocery code of conduct, which would be to ensure that there is more transparency and accountability in all aspects of the food chain.
That is why I made reference, in my concluding remarks, to farmers. I focused on Manitoba, but that same principle can be applied throughout Canada. We have the best producers in the world with the quality of the product and the food. We play a very important role in the world for food. It is important that we not only continue to support our farmers and producers but also look at ways to ensure farmers are getting their fair share of the value of the products they produce.
One of the ways we could do that would be by looking at the grocery code of conduct to ensure that the big five grocers, in particular, and others buy into it. We need to ensure there is more transparency and accountability so the producers are getting a better price for the products they are producing. We have strong advocates out there for that. I cited a few of them. One I recently had the opportunity to tour was Peak of the Market, which emphasizes the importance of vegetables. People do not realize that things like onions and potatoes are grown and supplied year-round.
There are all sorts of mechanisms, whether they be budgetary measures or legislative measures, that the government has been using to support not only our producers but also, most importantly, the consumers of the products. This is because we are very much aware of the cost of food. It is nice that this is going in the right direction, and that has taken a lot of work being done by a wide spectrum of individuals, including governments of all political stripes. I believe there is still more to do, and we are committed to doing just that.
324 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Jun/4/24 3:19:22 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, I want to conclude my remarks by acknowledging the food supply chain and, in particular, our farmers, whether they be the cattle producers in the Interlake region of Manitoba, the pork producers in the pork industry or the chicken and grain producers all over southern Manitoba.
I must say that it is a beautiful sight, come fall time, to see the endless fields of yellow and gold. We get a very enhanced perception as to what degree Manitoba, the Prairies or even Canada as a whole, are there to ensure that we are providing food not only for people in Canada, but also for those around the world. Personally, I want to ensure, as much as possible, that they are getting the dollars they deserve for the work they are doing.
When it comes to Loblaws, Metro, Sobeys, Costco and Walmart, we are watching.
146 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Mr. Speaker, I listened very closely to what the member said, and I would like to provide some comments in regard to some very specific things that he put on the record this morning.
First and foremost, let me emphasize one of the biggest misrepresentations of reality that the member tried to portray. That is to give the impression in any fashion whatsoever that the government does not recognize the true value of our farmers and what they do, not only in local communities but for the broader world. That does a disservice to the farmers. We, at least on the government benches, recognize that the farmer is the one who experiences climate change at the ground level in a very real and tangible way. If only there were Conservative members of Parliament who recognized that climate change is a reality, because farmers know and appreciate and understand that climate change is in fact a reality.
We have a substantial agreement. We are talking about hundreds of millions of dollars, leading to approximately $3.5 billion. We have heard of the sustainable Canadian agricultural partnership, which is there to support farmers in the community in dealing with issues like climate change. They are tangible dollars to support farmers in the advances that they have taken and to encourage continued advances in regard to recognizing and fighting climate change reality.
The member stood in this place and mentioned, right at the very beginning, the Conservative Party agenda. I suspect we might be hearing more about the Conservative agenda. He said the Conservative Party has four priorities, and priority number one is axing the tax.
Some hon. members: Hear, hear!
Mr. Kevin Lamoureux: Mr. Speaker, members are saying, “Hear, hear!” They like that priority. How far the Conservative Party has come from the last general election, when that member and every other member who was elected in that election, or all candidates who ran in that election, campaigned on an election platform that said they supported a price on pollution. Now they are saying that they just want, at all costs, to axe the tax, which kind of feeds into the idea that they have no concept of the reality of climate change and the responsibility of good government to bring in policies to deal with climate change.
Whether it is the Ukrainian government, the Canadian government or many states in the United States, they recognize that the price on pollution is a positive policy.
Priority number two for the Conservative Party, as the member across the way said, was dealing with housing. No government in the history of Canada, with a possible exception on a per capita basis in the 1940s, has invested more in housing than this government has in the last eight years. When the leader of the Conservative Party was the person responsible for housing, he was an absolute and total disaster on the issue of housing.
Let us contrast that to this government, which has a number of housing programs to deal with what the member across the way said was the Conservative Party's priority. There is a myriad of programs to support Canadians. Never before have we seen a national government take such a proactive approach to dealing with the issue of housing.
Priority number three that the member referenced in his opening remarks is that the Conservatives would get federal spending under control. Canadians need to be aware of what that hidden Conservative right, MAGA agenda is all about. The Conservatives' agenda is to look at ways in which they can cut back on valuable programs that Canadians are very much dependent on and want to see. Whether it is programs like child care, dental care or whatever it might be, the Conservatives' priority number three is to cut government expenditures. The member just said that.
Whether it is programs like child care, dental care or whatever it might be, the Conservatives' priority number three is to cut government expenditures. The member just said that.
As the Conservatives said, there are the top four items. The fourth item is the issue of crime. There is a difference in approach between the Liberals and the Conservatives on the issue of crime. Whether it is urban or rural, we believe we need to take action that puts a stronger emphasis on repeat offenders, as we saw with the bail reform bill, which took a huge effort not only from this government but also from provincial jurisdictions and many other stakeholders, including the courts, to bring forward legislation. However, the Conservative Party wanted to filibuster and prevent its quick passage, even though everyone else in the country recognized the importance of that bail reform legislation.
On those four priority issues the Conservative Party talks about, I would suggest they will be found wanting. I look forward to the ongoing debates on those issues and others.
When we talk about our farming community, the member made reference to the hog industry in his comments. He said that the hog industry was in trouble, and he talked about a hog farmer in his riding or close to his area. He tried to give the impression to those listening that hog farmers are experiencing a difficult time.
This is not to take away from addressing those important issues, whether one is a hog farmer, a cattle farmer, a wheat farmer or whatever they might be. As a government, we are very sympathetic and are working with our farming community in order to ensure that we have good, sound policy. However, the Minister of International Trade was in Winnipeg just the other day, and we met with Manitoba Pork and with the hog industry at the research centre with the University of Manitoba. Manitoba's hog industry is doing better than it ever has, period, and I believe somewhere around eight million piglets are born in Manitoba every year now. That industry is creating not only thousands of direct jobs but also thousands of indirect jobs as well.
As a government, we recognize that the farming community, whether it is dealing with animal waste or making sure of the quality and the health of the earth, continues to be sustainable well into the future. We will find that government policy and how it works with the different stakeholders supports just that. We invest literally hundreds of millions of dollars every year to ensure we are there to support farmers in a very real, tangible way, and we will continue to work with the industry.
We disagree wholeheartedly with the Conservatives' number one priority of getting rid of or axing the carbon tax. It is highly irresponsible. I look forward to one day being able to knock on a door and to reinforce to my constituents that the Conservative Party does not have any idea or concept. The MAGA Conservative Party of today does a great disservice to the constituents I represent. At the end of the day, climate change is real, and the Conservative Party needs to start being more honest and transparent with Canadians about the environment issue.
1190 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Dec/12/23 7:00:40 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, I would not agree with the member's conclusions; again, he tries to imply misinformation. It is just not true that the Government of Canada does not support farmers.
We can go back to the days when I was an opposition member; I just made reference to the Canadian Wheat Board, and I was on Main Street, by Portage Avenue. I can tell the member that there were hundreds of farmers out there, furious with the Stephen Harper government. They believed the government was destroying the industry and, at least in part, many of those farming industries.
We are always going to find that the Liberal government as a whole has been and continues to be exceptionally supportive of farming and rural communities. This can be found through a wide variety of measures, whether it is budgetary motions or the expansion of international trade. No government has signed off on more trade agreements than the current government has; this has enhanced all sorts of opportunities for farmers. We will find that, on agricultural products, a good percentage is actually exported outside Canada. A good example of that is the hog industry; in the province of Manitoba, that industry is doing exceptionally well. There are certain industries within our rural communities that we could give more attention to, and the government will continue to do so.
What I find somewhat sad is that the Conservative Party of Canada is trying to utilize the farming community, as they are doing with indigenous communities now, to try to win the battle of getting rid of the price on pollution. The Conservative Party needs to wake up and realize that it is only the Conservative Party of Canada that seems to want to deny that sensible approach for dealing with climate change. The world is moving towards recognizing climate change and bringing in progressive policies, such as the price on pollution.
We have to take into consideration individuals such as Dawn. When she talks about interest rates and the impact of carbon pricing, we need to listen. Where the government is in a position to take action, I believe it is doing just that. However, to use farmers such as Dawn as a political tool to get rid of the price on pollution generally is wrong.
384 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Dec/5/23 7:53:03 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, it is interesting that the member seems to be of the opinion that it is the government that has some sort of link, and that we are meeting with the senators and so forth, when, in fact, they are independent senators. The only ones who are politically affiliated are the Conservative senators. The Conservative caucus actually meets tomorrow, both the members of Parliament and the Conservative senators of Canada. They are the ones who get together on a weekly basis when the House is in session, in order to develop a strategy.
The Conservative Party is using the farmers to try to highlight its bumper sticker that says, “Axe the tax.” It is a political manipulation of the farmers. That is what we are seeing. It is just like when the Conservatives make reference to other aspects of the price on pollution. I get it. The Conservative Party of Canada has flip-flopped, for the 10th time, it seems, and most recently, its members are saying that they oppose the price on pollution; that is what they are saying today. I suspect that there is a good chance they will stick with that, because I suspect they already have the bumper stickers printed.
The world is leaving the Conservative Party behind. Even though the world recognizes that climate change is, in fact, real, the Conservative Party continues to say nothing about an environmental plan. What is somewhat shameful is that the Conservatives are picking and choosing in order to try to cause division on a sound policy. The member made reference to some exemptions. Yes, for the rural communities there is the top-up in terms of the rebates, and gas and diesel are exempt. However, at the end of the day, we are finding that the Conservatives are trying to whittle away here and there, but their objective is to get rid of a price on pollution. I look at it from the point of view that the price on pollution is something on which the Conservative Party stands completely alone in the House. Whether it is the Bloc members, New Democrats, Liberals or Greens, we all understand the importance of a price on pollution.
What is nice about the price on pollution that we put into place is that there is a significant rebate component. When the Conservative Party goes coast to coast to coast, going into communities like Winnipeg North and saying, “Well, we're going to axe the tax”, they do not say that they are axing the rebates also. In Winnipeg North, 80% of the residents I represent get more money back; they get a net benefit, but the Conservatives do not talk about that. Instead, they continue on the far right, which does not give a darn about the environment, and they continue to deny climate change. I think it is reckless, and it is bad Conservative policy.
490 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Nov/29/23 5:28:02 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, during the worldwide pandemic, the Government of Canada literally supported small businesses in virtually every sector to ensure their survival during a very difficult time. How we ensure that we can minimize the amount of hurt to small businesses is an ongoing issue.
To pick up on what the member first spoke about in regard to how important the diversification of our agricultural community is, it is really important to the government. That is one of the reasons why we invest so much in our regional development agencies, knowing full well that they are in a great position to identify where we can expand and make sure diversification takes place. More processing is really important. I like to think of the pea processing facility just north of Portage Avenue as a good example of the diversification taking place. I think there are so many other examples that one could give, but the bottom line is that the government, virtually from day one, in 2015, until the present day with the fall economic statement, is there to support our farmers and our agricultural communities.
185 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Nov/29/23 5:25:56 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, I wish a happy birthday, and many more, to Heather in Regina.
I believe that farmers, in many ways, lead in terms of innovations and making sure we have wonderful, successful farming in rural communities into the future. I applaud them to the nth degree for that.
The issue I have is that the Conservative Party wants to chip away here and chip away there. Ultimately, let there be no doubt, what it really wants is to get rid of the price on pollution. Conservatives have said that and have been very clear on the point. It is kind of a dumb idea, I would suggest, but they are determined to put it into place.
I have to defend the constituents I represent who actually get more money from the rebate than they pay. Eighty per cent get a larger rebate portion.
144 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Nov/29/23 5:04:37 p.m.
- Watch
- Re: Bill S-9
Madam Speaker, I have a lot of opinions and thoughts on farms. Members might not be necessarily surprised. After all, I come from the Prairies, and I was born and raised in the Prairies. I have lived on Manitoba, Saskatchewan and Alberta. While in Alberta, I was a member of the Canadian Forces. I have grown a great appreciation for farms. How could one live on the Prairies for 60 years and not appreciate the value of our farms? I am going to get into some details on that, relatively shortly.
I really want to focus on why this is. I put it in the form of a question to the member who brought forward the motion.
Liberals in general are open to talking about the farming community. We understand the appreciation of agriculture and the importance it has not only to Canada but also to the world. Canada, in many ways, does help to feed the entire world. The types of products we produce on the Prairies and throughout Canada are second to none. No other country in the world has the diversity of product, not to mention the quality of product. Therefore, I understand and appreciate, as my colleagues do, the importance of our agricultural communities, our rural communities and the farmer.
I say that because I wanted to focus some attention on the behaviour of the Conservative Party today and the disturbing pattern we are witnessing day after day. I suspect that most members who came into the chamber today did not want or expect the Conservatives to move yet another motion for concurrence in a committee report. That is what this is: a motion for concurrence. The motion is that we, in essence, talk about farmers, agriculture, and the industry as a whole that feeds off of it.
Let us not forget that there was another very important issue we were supposed to be debating today. It was, in fact, Bill S-9. Bill S-9 is all about weapons of mass destruction. Canada plays a very important leadership role around the world, and one of the areas in which we play that role is the area of weapons of mass destruction.
I remember the day Lloyd Axworthy brought the land mine issue to Ottawa. We had a worldwide ban and a convention came out of it. Bill S-9 deals with the chemical weapons convention, the listing of chemicals, and it would reinforce that particular aspect of Canada's role. Fortunately, it was brought in through the Senate because of the legislative agenda we are trying to get through.
Even in some of the comments I heard from across the way in the previous two speeches, the members talked about the importance of affordability. Tomorrow and the following day, we will be talking about the fall economic statement because we understand the issues that are so critically important to Canadians.
I want to tell my friends across the way that using motions for concurrence in committee reports takes away from the government's ability to get its legislation through. It is interesting. When I posed the question to the mover of the motion, his response was that it is up to the government to get things through. The government is trying to get things through. We were planning on bringing forward Bill S-9 today in the hope that we would be able to get that legislation passed because I do not think anyone will be opposing it.
Now, we are losing a day to pass that legislation, so if we want to deal with Bill S-9, we will have to call it to the chamber again. Opposition members will say, “Who cares? It's not our problem. It's the government's problem.” If we cannot bring in items such time allocation, how can the government possibly pass legislation when we have an opposition party that is preventing the government from doing just that?
We are talking about food for the world. I have heard members on the other side talk about trade many times. Members can think about Ukraine, the trade agreement Canada has with Ukraine, and the impact that has on food supply, processing foods and so forth.
The Conservative Party, all its members, voted against that important piece of legislation, the trade agreement between Canada and Ukraine. The people of Canada understand and value the legislation, and they are not the only ones who want to see it pass. There is the Ukrainian Canadian Congress, the ambassador from Ukraine to Canada, the politicians in Ukraine and members from every other political party, except the Conservative Party.
The president of Ukraine came to Canada at a time of war and signed an agreement. The legislation was brought forward, and the Conservatives filibustered. They used the same tactic they are using right now with a concurrence report. Bringing in concurrence report after concurrence report, is limiting the number of debate days the government will have. Is this an attempt by the Conservative Party to prevent the Canada-Ukraine free trade debate from taking place at third reading?
Does the Conservative Party not understand that there is legislation, such as the fall economic statement, that needs to be debated in the chamber? If they continue to bring in concurrence reports, they will continue to take time away from debating the legislative agenda. Many, including myself, want to see a number of pieces of legislation debated.
This is not to take away from the issues the member is raising today concerning farmers and our agricultural community. As I said at the beginning, I am a very strong advocate for those two communities. I have given many speeches in the House, as I know my colleagues appreciate. Every week, when we are in session and in caucus, the rural agenda is there and being talked about. We understand and appreciate the needs of our rural communities, our farmers and our smaller municipalities, as well as how vital they are to Canadian society.
Why did the Conservative Party do this? We will have another opposition day next week. We have maybe 12 more sitting days before the break. How many of those days will we be dealing with the fall economic statement? We have an opposition day next week. The number of days is shrinking, and if the intent of the Conservative Party is to prevent the Canada-Ukraine deal from getting to third reading and passing, I say shame on them.
That is not the only legislation, but there is a lot of focus on it. The Conservatives wonder why we bring it up time and time again, and it is because we do not trust the Conservative Party. It has gone so far to the right. We see that attitude in the leader of the official opposition taking his party to a place where it votes in ways that are very hard to understand for one reason.
We already heard two members stand up to speak to this issue, and they strictly talked about the carbon tax, as they referred to it, or the price on pollution. The Conservatives are using that as an excuse for everything they are doing in the chamber. It is reckless. That is what we are witnessing. We have a leader of the official opposition who is not in tune with what Canadians are asking legislators to do here in Ottawa.
It is only a question of time before Canadians actually realize the destructive behaviour of the Conservative Party today. That is why I think it is important, as a Liberal member of Parliament, to amplify it and to ensure that Canadians know and understand what is in fact taking place, and that there are important things that need to be passed here.
The report talks about infrastructure. Recommendation 1 is to associate infrastructure with trade. It highlights infrastructure and trade. No government has spent more and committed more on infrastructure in the last 50 or 60 years than the current Liberal government has, because we understand and appreciate the importance of having a healthy infrastructure so we can get our product to market, whether a local market or an international market. It is one thing to talk about it, but it is another thing to see the action. With the Liberal government, we have seen action supporting investment in Canada's infrastructure from coast to coast to coast.
The Conservatives say “access” and “making sure”. Over the summer, a number of months ago, the former minister of transport was in CentrePort in Winnipeg, just outside my riding. It is a huge park, thousands of acres, strategically located near rail lines and a first-class long-haul trucking industry, the biggest in the province, possibly the biggest in the Prairies. There is an airport literally a couple of miles away. There is a great deal of focus on infrastructure and how we can get products to market. We see the agricultural community coming into CentrePort in a very real and tangible way.
It is not that we do not want to have those types of discussions. That is why we have standing committees. The New Democratic member stood up and said that it was nice we were having a debate on agriculture in the chamber today. I would like to think that we have debates and discussions on agriculture on an ongoing basis, whether they are budget debates, throne speech debates or the numerous private members' bill debates that take place.
One of the reasons we have standing committees is so we can actually look at and take a deeper dive into an issue. That enables, I believe, reports like the one we have today. With those reports, Canadians can get a better understanding of where the House of Commons or the collective parliamentarians would like to see the government of the day take some form of direction. That is what I like about the system.
What I do not like is when reports are consistently used as a mechanism, through concurrence, to prevent debates from taking place on government legislation. That is very problematic. The Conservatives will say that it is the government's responsibility to bring forward the legislation. We are bringing forward the legislation; it is the opposition that is preventing the legislation from being debated. It is the opposition that is choosing the tools it has in order to filibuster legislation.
Some members across the way are laughing. Our Ukrainian heritage community is not laughing; it is upset because it sees the games the Conservative Party of Canada is playing. That needs to change. I cited just one piece of legislation, but there are numerous ones. Even during the pandemic, with regard to financial supports to Canadians, we saw the Conservatives using concurrence as a way to prevent government legislation from moving forward. They used an excessive number of concurrence reports. They have the standard line: “This is an important issue; why would we not want to be able to debate the issue?" They make it sound as if the government were not being sensitive to the issue.
I ask my Conservative friends across the way, if the issues were as important, from a Conservative perspective, as they try to imply to Canadians, why are they not using them as opposition day motions? They have plenty of opposition days when they get the entire day to be able to debate the issues they want to debate, just like yesterday, when they chose to debate the Senate and the behaviour of the Senate.
It is rooted in the price on pollution, I must say, because the Conservative Party of today is very much infiltrated by individuals who are truly climate deniers. Maybe not all members of the Conservative caucus are; I suspect not. However, I do believe there is a preoccupation within the leader of the Conservative's party, which is, in fact, climate denial. The Conservatives are so fixated on the issue of getting rid of the price on pollution. Think about it in terms of this particular report. In the report, members are saying that the price on pollution is scaring farmers away and that they are going to shut down and go elsewhere with their produce.
During the last break week, I had the opportunity to go just north of Portage la Prairie to Roquette, a world-class pea processing facility. Did members know that the largest pea processing plant in the world is in the province of Manitoba? I can say that I am quite proud of that particular fact. The facility creates all sorts of opportunities for the farmers in the area. I am told it even has to bring in some yellow peas from other jurisdictions because it cannot keep up with the demand. The demand is going to continue to grow. The facility is actually diversifying, which is great news. It reinforces that the world is looking at Canada as a place to be able to invest in, and that includes our agricultural community. The role of the farmer is just as real today as it was in any day in the past. The innovators in our environment are often farmers. We do not give our farmers enough credit. Quite frankly, what I do not like is when they are used as a political tool. I was in opposition when the Conservatives got rid of the Canadian Wheat Board.
Suffice to say, I really and truly believe that the Conservative Party needs to get its ship in order, whether with the Canada-Ukraine trade agreement or stopping the filibustering and the preventing of legislation from being able to pass. There is a minority government; that means there is an expectation that opposition members would also behave. There is nothing wrong with criticizing. I was in opposition for 20-plus years, so I understand that role. There is also a role in terms of being a little bit more creative in one's opposition.
2351 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Nov/28/23 4:18:12 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, I think we should try to clarify the arguments for those who are trying to follow this.
When it comes to the issue at hand, let there be no doubt that the Conservative Party of Canada opposes the price on pollution. Many would say it is because Conservatives are climate deniers. They will go out of their way on all aspects in order to amplify that. The best example I can actually provide members across the way is how the far right has taken over the leadership of the Conservative Party and their office. They actually, collectively, voted against the Canada-Ukraine trade agreement because of the price on pollution. They want the price on pollution to be the campaign issue.
I am not going to disappoint them. I am going to tell my constituents that they voted against the Canada-Ukraine trade agreement. The Conservatives constantly vote in a negative fashion on Canada's environmental issues. They are climate deniers. That is the bottom line. Today, they are using the excuse of farmers. I find it unacceptable—
181 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Nov/22/23 6:13:26 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, I want to start off by reflecting on a tour that the Minister of Agriculture and I had last week. We had the opportunity to tour the Maple Leaf Foods processing centre on Lagimodiere Boulevard. It is such an impressive facility, and members will understand why I use it as an example.
With respect to Manitoba's pork industry, one only needs to take a tour of a facility of that nature to see literally hundreds of people hard at work providing a quality product. In this case, it is bacon. Do members realize that half of all the bacon produced and eaten here in Canada comes from that particular factory? I very much appreciated that the Minister of Agriculture came to visit Winnipeg and toured the facility. Fantastic hospitality was provided to the two of us, recognizing how important the hog industry and the pork industry are to the province of Manitoba.
With respect to the legislation we are talking about, let me bring a direct link to it. Some individuals are very concerned, specifically farmers, producers, manufacturers and processors. There are a litany of opportunities for people to be engaged within the pork industry. Let me give some examples of that.
I had the opportunity to tour a hog barn, and the first thing I thought of when going into the hog barn was that I would be seeing lots of hogs. I was not disappointed; I saw lots of hogs. There were over 10,000 hogs in one barn. However, what surprised me was that when someone walks into the barn, the very first thing they do is put on a smock, take a shower and use all sorts of cleansing materials to make sure they are all washed up and in a state to take a tour of the facility. The second thing they see is the computers and technology used to make sure of the quality of the product, from the day a piglet is born to the day it is hauled out of the barn. It is a very impressive sight to witness. In this case, we heard about the age of the pig from the time it enters the barn and the type of food being processed.
It was interesting that earlier that week, I had a tour with the Minister of Agriculture in Portage la Prairie. In Portage la Prairie, just north, is Roquette, which is the largest pea manufacturer in the world. Parts of crushed yellow peas are used for feed, so we can get a sense of how that particular product is used as feed where I had taken a tour. Imagine the jobs there, the jobs on the hog farm and the jobs at Maple Leaf, not to mention the indirect jobs.
In Manitoba, thousands of Manitobans are employed in the hog industry. There are even more indirect jobs. We can drive out to the plant in Brandon, where there is a workforce of over 1,200, or to the Lagimodiere plant I visited, where there are over 1,500 workers. There are other plants, and they are not just in Manitoba. Whether looking at parking lots or visiting homes, we see consumers. They go to restaurants, they buy furniture and they buy vehicles, all of which are the residuals of jobs.
As I indicated, the pork from this plant is ham and bacon, the best bacon in the world. That bacon is circulated throughout the country and plays a very important role in our food chain. If we bring it all the way back to this particular piece of legislation, what farmers are asking for is that the legislation protect not only their interests but the interests of the food we produce.
As I pointed out, when I took the tour, it was critically important that anyone going into these facilities had taken the appropriate means to be there. Unfortunately, there are some in society who might not understand how important that is. When they enter a facility or even get close to a facility, which is private property, that puts it into jeopardy, potentially, and causes a great deal of harm, whether it is to the farmer, the animals themselves or our food chain.
When I look at the legislation being proposed today, I know the government is going to be supporting it, because the government understands, as we have witnessed, the importance of the food supply, which is not just for the province or even the country. Canada has now entered into more trade agreements than any other G7 or G20 country in all the different regions of the world. That in itself is one of the ways to ensure that we continue to supply food products.
If I were to stay with the hog industry and use it as an example, I could go to Neepawa, which employs close to 1,000 employees at the plant. It might be over 1,000. Over 95% of its product is exported to Asia. Again, if we follow the line, it goes right back to the hog producer and those barns. That is why, whether it is hogs, cattle or chickens, these farm products and animals play a very important role in our critical food supply system. They are not just for Manitoba and Canada but indeed the world.
It is those comments that I wanted to get on the record this evening. I give a special shout-out to Maple Leaf, but necessarily limited to it. Whether it is the communities of Winkler, Neepawa, Brandon or Winnipeg, not to mention the rural communities raising hogs, I know all contribute to a hog industry in Manitoba that all of us can be proud of, one that creates literally thousands and thousands of jobs and that provides good-quality food around the world.
976 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Oct/25/23 7:19:42 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, the member is talking about a very important issue, and there is no doubt about that. I am very sympathetic to the farmer, and also very understanding of the Conservative Party's positioning on the issue of the price on pollution, or carbon tax, whatever one wants to call it.
When it comes to farmers, I do believe there have been some healthy discussions with different ministers, in particular the Minister of Agriculture, who has been following this issue very closely. We want to ensure, as much as possible, we are helping farmers.
At times I too get frustrated. I remember when I was in opposition and there were huge ships out in the Pacific Ocean that were not able to come in and pick up the wheat piles all over the Prairies. The wheat, in many cases, was getting wet, and there were serious issues back then. The member would know, if he recalls, at the time there was that issue along with the one of the Canadian wheat board.
I bring this up because I do very much follow agriculture and the importance of food supply. Canada plays a critical role in this whole area. I would like to think, given the number of stakeholders out there, that they will continue to work with not only the federal government but provincial jurisdictions, and to a certain degree the many municipalities. We need to ensure farmers are supported in a very real and tangible way.
However, then the member brings in the issue of the carbon tax. As the member is very much aware, it is very much an issue of contention in Ottawa nowadays. The Conservative Party says it will get rid of the carbon tax, or the price on pollution, and its members have made that commitment. If by chance, whether it is in two years, four years, six years or eight years, they ever get the opportunity to govern, I suspect there is a very good chance that commitment will happen. I say that tongue in cheek to a certain degree because in the last campaign, they actually campaigned in favour of a price on pollution. When it was in the election platform, did they exempt the farmer? If not, why did they not do that? I would be very much interested in knowing if the member is aware of that.
Having said that, I realize there has been a change, but it is an important point. It demonstrates consistency of party policy. The member knows full well the government's position on the price on pollution and the carbon tax. We will continue to provide rebates. We should continue to have dialogue with farmers and see how the government can continue to work with the agricultural community to ensure it is able to continue to grow and prosper. The agricultural community as a whole is one of the greatest environmentalists in the nation. On many of the techniques and ways it cultivates land, we lead the world. We also lead the world in many different ways when it comes to the environment.
519 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Mr. Speaker, the member just made my point. He is giving a false impression. He is trying to say to farmers, hunters and indigenous people that we are going to take away their guns. That is balderdash. That is not the case.
Does the member not realize that he is doing a great disservice to the whole debate, a debate that Canadians from coast to coast are concerned about? They want safer communities. This legislation would provide safer communities.
On the record, in terms of rural versus urban, the member might note that I periodically get the chance to stand up and address legislation. I always welcome that. I never look at it as an urban-rural split. I like to think that I am very sensitive to all rural issues. It is one of the reasons I spend a lot of time talking about agricultural issues.
147 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Madam Speaker, when I think of vegetables and fruits, I think of Peak of the Market in the province of Manitoba.
Manitoba produces the best vegetables, I would argue, in the world. Some might question that, but it is the yellow potatoes, white potatoes, red potatoes and so much more, along with the carrots, cabbage and turnips. There are so many things. Peak of the Market seems to know what it is doing. It brings everything together and puts that stamp of it being made in Manitoba or being from the Prairies.
I appreciate what the member says. I love the farmers. These people who are producing, helping us and feeding the world, are doing an incredible job. Has the member had any discussions with organizations, such as Peak of the Market, to get their sense of what he is proposing today?
142 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Oct/6/22 1:02:33 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, I can tell the member that I love the prairie farmers. I love our farmers. In fact, we are investing hundreds of millions of dollars to support our farmers in regard to the environment. We are spending more money in the Department of Agriculture than the Stephen Harper government ever did.
When it comes to—
Some hon. members: Oh, oh!
63 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Apr/26/22 4:17:17 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, the Minister of Agriculture and the government have been working very closely with industry on a number of different files, and over the last number of years we have seen, through a lot of federal investment, growth in the industry and of our agricultural community. If I take a look at my home province of Manitoba, I see substantial growth in industries such as our pork industry, which continues to grow. Jobs were just added in the community of Saint Boniface, and as a direct result of those jobs, we will end up with more jobs in Saskatchewan, Alberta and even, to a certain degree, Ontario too.
Our agricultural community continues to grow, and I think the member is underestimating the value and the contributions our farmers and rural communities are making to our economy when he tries to give the impression that we are seeing shrinkage. In fact, there has been government investment, and we have seen growth in our rural sectors.
165 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- menumenu
- notificationsnotifications
- home
- mailmail
- searchsearch
