SoVote

Decentralized Democracy

House Hansard - 190

44th Parl. 1st Sess.
May 3, 2023 02:00PM
  • May/3/23 8:45:55 p.m.
  • Watch
  • Re: Bill S-6 
Madam Speaker, I am pleased to rise today to speak to Bill S-6. I think we are all pleased to speak to a bill that seeks to cut red tape, reduce delays and increase efficiency. When it comes to increased flexibility and efficiency, the answer is yes. We are there to support that. That is what we want to do. When it comes to reducing delays, the answer is yes. The member for Joliette said earlier that this bill was introduced in 2018 and that we are debating it in 2023. Someone asked why that was. I am tempted to tell them that this bill is moving through the House at a speed that is directly proportional to the speed at which this government takes action. We spend our time waiting for things to happen. I want to make a little aside about what is going on in the news. For months now, information has been coming out in dribs and drabs about potential foreign interference in our democratic process, and nothing is being done. The much-talked-about public inquiry will probably happen, but likely not before next year, because that is how slowly things move in the House. Fortunately, we are here. The opposition is here to pressure this government into taking action. We will do that today for that reason. Yes, we are here to support efficiency, but we will not support a lack of transparency. What we like is transparency. Some parts of Bill S‑6 have me concerned a bit. Others are obvious. There are, for example, changes to Innovation, Science and Economic Development to make it easier to withdraw a mediation application if a settlement is reached. I hope this will happen, as it seems obvious and is only normal. The best part is that it would clear the court backlogs. There is also the matter of having meters read through other means instead of getting a person to read them. I hope this will happen. There are other things, such as allowing interim authorizations under trade conditions. Earlier my colleagues were talking about trademarks and having greater efficiency and fluidity. I am okay with that. The details of this bill still need to be studied and that is where the committee comes in. There is less confusion for business corporations, co-operatives and not-for-profit organizations when it comes to the distinction between annual reports and annual statements. As we know, our good government asks people for so much paperwork that they get all mixed up. There is also the immigration issue. I would like to tell a story about someone from my riding. It is the story of a foreign worker who applied to renew her work permit. She had applied for permanent residency and was waiting. This Spanish-speaking woman was buried under paperwork, sometimes in English and other times in French, and she became very confused. In the meantime, she received her Quebec selection certificate, and, naively, she did not apply to renew her work permit. Let us put ourselves in her shoes. It is starting to become the norm to receive all kinds of paperwork, to have to deal with different levels of government, and to have different deadlines at each level. Sometimes, the second government is so slow that the first application has to be resubmitted. This will again cost money, because it is the fault of the second government. Of course that does not matter to the second government. The person must pay. Everyone knows that the second government I am referring to is obviously the federal government. The Bloc will have only one government, and it will be the right one. I was saying that because she had received her Quebec selection certificate, she did not apply to renew her work permit. A few days later, when she went to see her employer to celebrate, her employer realized that it was the wrong document and told her that she had to apply to renew her work permit. Unfortunately, the deadline for the renewal application was the day before. We are not talking six months prior. I do not want to get angry here, but it is hard not to. These people we are talking about, here in this disconnected Parliament, we met them in person and we saw them crying, sitting at our desk. It was not six months later, it was the next day, yet we could not get the renewal application accepted. If someone applies for a renewal while their permit is active, they can continue to work until they get the new one. It does not matter because the application has been submitted. However, if an individual applies after the deadline, too bad. They have to wait three months to get a new work permit. The person I am talking about had to live on charity for several weeks, in a G7 country. I will end my digression by saying that it is good to reduce wait times. My time is running out, and I still have lots I want to talk about. I have to talk about agriculture, but before I do, I must express my doubts about the part that deals with oil and gas. I am not sure why. Perhaps it is because of Bay du Nord, or because of the new offshore oil and gas exploration licenses. When I see the words “natural resources” and “oil” together, and that the requirement to publish information is being lifted, I have some serious doubts. There will be a lot of work to do. Is it because they want to sneak things past us? I will stop talking about oil now. I could talk about it for another 10 minutes, but I only have three and a half minutes left. With regard to the agricultural industry, when I hear that the government wants to facilitate the recognition of international standards, there are a few things that come to mind. I have had some traumatic experiences with the federal government since I became an MP three and a half years ago. One of them was the review of the thresholds for glyphosate, fungicide and herbicide residues, which the government tried to quietly sneak past us during the construction holiday one summer when the weather was hot and sunny. The Liberals thought that it would go unnoticed. I remember that we were dumbfounded. It was done without any kind of announcement or anything. What was even more shocking was that our farmers told us that they did not know where that measure came from, that they had never asked for it and that they were respecting the thresholds. The Canadian Food Inspection Agency told us that it was to align with international standards. I am pleased to see that my colleague from Beauce is here because he will be happy that I am talking about this. When I hear that we are going to align with international standards and increase the thresholds for pesticide and fungicide residue, the message that I am getting is that we are going to bring in poor quality products from other countries, as is too often the case. There is talk of reciprocity of standards. I am all for streamlining and adopting international standards to make trade easier, but I do not want us to lower these standards. I do not want us to fail to meet the expectations of our constituents, our consumers. People are expecting us to ensure quality. Our producers are proud, strong and efficient. They deliver quality. I do not want to undermine that because all of sudden someone decides to accept international standards. Carrots from Mexico may contain more pesticides than carrots that grow in Quebec. There is nonsense that does not appear in the official speeches, but exists on the ground daily. This is important. Aligning our standards can be useful, but we have to do so effectively and quickly, by relying on science and using the precautionary principle. I do not often hear anyone talk about the precautionary principle. Today, the Minister of Agriculture announced assurances that seeds created with gene editing would be monitored. That is good. We are pleased, but the monitoring will be done by the private sector with subsequent supervision by the state. I am less keen on that. I think that is the government's responsibility. I think we are capable of doing this effectively. We are in a situation where the state is not moving quickly enough, and we are going to let the public sector take action. I do not think that is the right thing to do. Last year, we had a problem with the approval of linuron, a product used when growing carrots. There was a small change in the formulation, and since Canada's study and review processes are so slow, the product was not approved. Our producers contacted us in a panic, told us they would not be able to grow their crop and that Quebeckers would be eating carrots from the United States, which uses the same product. Sometimes, we have to use common sense with regulations. I could probably keep talking about this for two or three hours, but I will stop now as my time has expired.
1557 words
All Topics
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • May/3/23 8:57:19 p.m.
  • Watch
  • Re: Bill S-6 
Madam Speaker, we would have to determine who is responsible for that spraying, but certainly, if what the member for Timmins—James Bay is reporting is true, it is very unfortunate. It means that things moved too fast and too much of the product was used. I am glad he asked me that question, because it enables me to talk about something I have not had time to address. In some places, we are being told that the minister will be allowed to enact practices from the private sector or from abroad by way of regulation and have them recognized. That may be fine, but it depends on how it is done. It must be properly studied. We cannot be careless.
123 words
All Topics
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • May/3/23 8:58:56 p.m.
  • Watch
  • Re: Bill S-6 
Madam Speaker, it is nice that we can have a little fun on an evening like this when we are working until midnight. I think the answer is the member for Berthier—Maskinongé.
35 words
All Topics
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • May/3/23 9:00:13 p.m.
  • Watch
  • Re: Bill S-6 
Madam Speaker, succession planning is very important. I thank my colleague for raising this subject. Yes, some latitude must be given. It is not all black and white. There are grey areas. The bill allows for a certain transition, but the deadlines are indeed restricted. I think there could be more flexibility in that regard. The government was worried about tax evasion. I would like to say to the members of this government that if they want to prevent tax evasion, they should go back and listen to the speech given tonight by my colleague from Joliette. They will learn a lot, and they will find out where the money is and how tax evasion is really happening.
118 words
All Topics
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • May/3/23 9:11:13 p.m.
  • Watch
  • Re: Bill S-6 
Madam Speaker, I thank my colleague for his speech, and I would also take this opportunity to thank him for his bill about financial protections for vegetable producers, which we will be happy to consider soon. My colleague talked about regulations and small cosmetic changes that are inadequate. We need to be more thorough. I would like to give him the opportunity to talk about regulations that apply to temporary foreign workers, which we talk about all the time. At the Standing Committee on Agriculture and Agri-Food, we must have raised this issue six times in reports. There has been so much talk and so little action that it has become a joke. I would like my colleague to comment on that. Can he mention one or two quick and easy changes that could be made to improve the lives of people and producers?
145 words
All Topics
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • May/3/23 9:51:40 p.m.
  • Watch
  • Re: Bill S-6 
Madam Speaker, I still find it rather ironic to hear my colleague say that he is prepared to move to a vote on the bill when he feels so inclined, while also making a rather convincing plea for public servants to be more efficient when it comes to bureaucracy. There is a bit of a contradiction there. How does my colleague feel about that? Does he not think we could move on to the next item on the agenda and move forward to set an example for our government with regard to improving bureaucracy?
95 words
All Topics
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border