44th Parl. 1st Sess.
June 8, 2023 10:00AM
Mr. Speaker, it is an honour to once again be able to rise and speak to my private member's bill, Bill C-294.
This bill comes from constituents in my riding who work at Honey Bee Manufacturing and brought the issue forward to me. It was an issue that came up when we were discussing the CUSMA negotiations. Although it predates CUSMA, it was flagged at that point in time, in the same breath. That was when it was first brought to my attention, and I was able to bring the issue to the House of Commons—
99 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Jun/8/23 6:25:41 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, it is an honour to be able to have this right to reply on a bill that I feel is of utmost importance, not just for the people of Cypress Hills—Grasslands and southwest Saskatchewan but also for the entire country. I am grateful for the support that I have received from my colleagues in the NDP, my colleagues in the Bloc Québécois and also the government.
I will speak favourably about the process that we went through at committee. We had a very collaborative approach, again, with members from all parties. I am willing to say that I even accepted a friendly government amendment that helped to provide a bit more certainty and clarity for the bill as it pertains to our trade agreements. As we know, that is a very important part when we are talking about something like this, so I was very happy to be able to do so.
I want to talk a bit more about farmers. The original intent of the bill was to address choice for farmers, as well as to be able to provide a bit more certainty for the manufacturers who make the products that our farmers rely upon.
I have Honey Bee Manufacturing in my riding. It is a big employer of people in the small town of Frontier; people from many of the communities around the area also commute to Frontier to be able to work there. It is a fantastic town. It is a fantastic company that does a terrific job. It employs well over 100 people, and probably closer to 200 people, in a town that only has about 300 people in it. Again, there are many other communities around it that people commute from to work there.
There are other great manufacturing companies, such as MacDon, which is a competitor to Honey Bee and also supports the bill. MacDon makes the FlexDraper header; Honey Bee makes the AirFlex header. The two companies are in competition with each other, but they are united in their support for this bill.
We look at other short-line manufacturers, such as Degelman, Vaderstad, Bourgault and Schulte. There are many great small-town Saskatchewan manufacturers that are supporting small-town communities, as well as supporting our farmers by providing them with the tools that they need to be able to put the crop in the ground and harvest it when the time comes in the fall. This is a fantastic bill. It is going to support our innovators and our farmers.
The bill applies to more than just farming. The concept of interoperability goes beyond just simply agriculture. In the digital sphere, we look at, for example, our smart phones. Everybody is aware that we have our Apple and Android phones. There is interoperability of applications to be able to work on both platforms, and this bill would strengthen the ability to have apps work on both platforms.
A really good example of interoperability is actually NATO and the position that Canada has within NATO when we talk about our military equipment, when our members go to other countries to fulfill their obligations and do the terrific job that they do around the world. Whether it be in peacekeeping or in training missions, Canadian troops do a fantastic job. This bill, in a way, would support what they are doing as well, because the interoperability of military equipment is extremely important to our troops, as well as to troops around the world. This actually has a far-reaching impact beyond just Canada.
With respect to our computers, without interoperability, people cannot even use a regular computer when it comes to plugging in a keyboard, mouse and monitor and having them work. In the old days, before we had everything all built into one, there were many products that would attach and plug into a computer.
The way that we are changing and redefining interoperability in the Copyright Act would provide more competition across the economy. The current Copyright Act only recognizes interoperability between two computer programs. This bill would expand the scope of that, so that it would be between a computer program and an interface or a device in which the program is embedded. Again, it would broaden the scope of interoperability. It would provide a better realization as to what interoperability looks like today; it would also provide the necessary flexibility for innovators tomorrow, next year and down the road. What is farming going to look like in the future? If we do not have changes like those in this bill, we are not going to have innovators in the future who can make the necessary equipment and changes to allow for that next great innovation.
We heard the Bloc members talk in their speeches about planned obsolescence. This bill would provide for higher-quality products out there across the entire economy to make sure that people have good, long-lasting equipment that is more environmentally sustainable and responsible. It would also provide choice for consumers, which is what is the most important.
851 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Jun/8/23 11:02:36 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, there is an issue with the bill about creating a bunch of new advisory bodies and a bunch of new committees. Going back to other bills the government has implemented where new committees and new advisory panels have been struck, quite often we see a stacking of the deck, with a bunch of Liberal insiders on the panels. At the end of the day, it is delaying things and causing issues in trying to get projects completed and built.
I know that people in Saskatchewan desperately need a port modernization strategy so we can get our products out of the Prairies. We are landlocked. We need the ports. These advisory panels generally do not do any good in helping the people in our situation. I am wondering if my colleague has any thoughts about that.
137 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Mr. Speaker, it is great to have such a lively audience here tonight in the chamber just past 11:30 p.m. It is fantastic to have a lively House of Commons. I really appreciate it.
We are here to talk about strengthening the port system and railway safety in Canada act, Bill C-33. This bill is important to me. The reason is that Saskatchewan, the province where I am from, is completely landlocked. We need our ports. We need railway access. Those are two hugely important fundamentals to the province of Saskatchewan.
Saskatchewan, in 2022, had over $81 billion in gross domestic product for this country. That is a fantastic output and a fantastic number. Saskatchewan does a fantastic job. It definitely punches above its weight, especially for a province that has roughly 1.2 million people. We do a great job. Obviously, agriculture and the energy sector are the main drivers of the economy where I am from.
I want to talk more about the agriculture side. In Saskatchewan, particularly southwest Saskatchewan, where I am from, we grow the vast majority of the pulse crops that the world relies upon, particularly the lentil crop. It is exported all over the world. Whether someone is growing organic crops or otherwise, we grow what the world wants and what the world needs.
The only way we can get those lentils around the world to all the countries that have such a high demand for them and for the protein they provide is through rail. When I look through this bill, I see it is trying to do some things around safety. It is trying to do some very important things around modernizing our ports. It is trying to strengthen our ports.
If we look at where our ports rank across the world, we see that we are right at the bottom. I am sure my colleague from Provencher, with whom I will be splitting my time, will want to touch on that later, so I will be sure to leave a few points for him to get to as well.
Access to ports and access to rail are so important. We have CN, we have CP and we have some really fantastic short-line rail operators. Our short-line operators are actually leading the charge on safety in the railway system. In fact, one of the owners of one of the railway companies reached out to me recently to send me an email regarding some of the statistics that the short-line operators have in Saskatchewan around safety. There are zero incidents, month over month. There are zero incidents.
They are running a high-quality rail line, taking care of their employees, providing great jobs and providing a service to the farmers, the producers and the shippers in Saskatchewan, and they are doing so while respecting the safety of the workers and providing high-quality service. That is what they are doing.
The email I got was from the Great Sandhills Railway. Our Saskatchewan caucus recently met with Great Western Rail, another fantastic short-line operator in our region that does a fantastic job of providing that service to farmers. It does so safely, while providing the fantastic jobs that are required to be able to meet that demand.
I was just messaging one of the exporters in my riding. They export farm equipment around the world. They export to 28 countries across the world. It is a farm implement dealership in a small town in Saskatchewan. It ships to 28 countries. How does it do that? It ships through the ports in Halifax, Montreal, Vancouver and, I believe, Prince Rupert.
Earlier today I heard my colleague from British Columbia talking about what the port of Prince Rupert actually means. It is the closest port to the Asian markets. The ports in Halifax and Montreal are some of the ports in North America that are closest to the European markets. They are very important access points.
One of the issues that they are dealing with in Vancouver is that it takes 12 days to get a container through. Montreal is closer to 10 days, and in Halifax, it takes 14 days to get a container through. Sometimes they are waiting over a month to even get a container. Trying to get access to the things they need to ship their products is not being addressed by this bill.
There is mention in the bill about setting up advisory panels and empowering the minister to set up authorities to deal with a variety of issues. However, the one thing that is not included as one of the issues that they would deal with is the actual production of the ports and making sure that they are getting results for producers and shippers. The bill would not require rail companies to make sure that they are providing the fullest service to shippers.
For example, CN does not do any business with Hapag-Lloyd. When we are sitting in Saskatchewan watching a train go past one of the many intersections that we have, we see Hapag-Lloyd's name on many containers. It is one of the more popular company names that we see going across Saskatchewan when we see sea cans going down the rail lines or on a flatbed truck, but CN does not deal with it.
How is that going to work for exporters in a landlocked province trying to export products? They also have to import pieces so they can build the product they are trying to make and then export. However, one of the biggest players, CN does not even deal with it, and there are other companies CN does not deal with as well. This is severely limiting the options for people trying to export a product, but the bill does not deal with that. These advisory panels that the government is looking to set up would not deal with that. It is not a priority for this government.
When we hear other colleagues talking about the bill needing to be withdrawn and strengthened, and that the government needs to do more, I would suggest that these are some of the things that need to be looked at in the bill. Why is it not a priority for the government to try to make sure that we get the best result for our exporters who do such a fantastic job?
All across this country, we care about the environment, reducing emissions and reducing greenhouse gases. We do that all across this country and across party lines; everybody cares about that. We have innovators in the prairie provinces that make world-class products, and they do so in a manner that is environmentally sustainable. These are products that people in the rest of the world need. If they had the technology, if they had the products that our farmers in Saskatchewan, Manitoba and Alberta have, they would be able to reduce their emissions as they harvest their crops in other regions of the world. They need what Canada has to offer, and without a robust port system, without a robust rail line, that cannot happen. I see that one of the advisory panels would actually deal with climate change, but do members think that it would bring this element of it up? No, not a chance. This will not be part of what the panel would talk about.
My hope is that the government, if it is going to appoint these advisory panels, will actually talk to the shippers, exporters and manufacturing companies; the people who are trying to get their far superior products out to the world market. The government should talk to them when it is talking about how it is going to achieve some of the things that these boards are going to do. It should make sure that there are actually people in industry, who are involved in taking real and meaningful actions on these boards to make sure that we can actually get things done in a timely manner, to benefit our country and the rest of the world, and do so in a sustainable manner. That is the power that a robust rail line and port system could have in this country, because Canada has what the world needs and wants.
We grow the products, we manufacture the goods and we export them. Some of those things have to get refined and brought back yet again, which is crazy; we could do much of that here in Canada. However, in order to do any of that, regardless of where we are at, we need a robust rail and shipping system, and we do not have that, but we could.
We have had a trans-Canada rail line for over 100 years. It has been around for a very long time. It was a huge marvel to get that project done. However, we still have not reached the full potential that a valuable resource like that could have. We need to utilize it. The bill before us should be strengthening and building that up. It should be focused on lifting the entire country up so that we can use those ports, especially for landlocked provinces. We have not just what the world wants, but we have what our country needs, if we could even just get our goods out to the provinces and out to the edges. We have what is needed.
I hope that the government will take these considerations to look at the bill and make a serious version of it so that we can actually accomplish what needs to be addressed.
1612 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Jun/8/23 11:46:22 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, in short, unfortunately the answer is no.
My private member's bill, which deals with interoperability, could actually help deal with some of the issues in the rail line system. It is going to help pave the way to be able to do that, so we have some commonality there.
When it comes to the trade agreements, my colleague from Abbotsford was somebody who negotiated a lot of those and got deals signed. Unfortunately, due to delays, maybe from some of the other countries and whatnot, the Conservatives did not get them fully implemented. Yes, the government finished some of those off, but it made some changes to them that we do not necessarily agree with.
The big point about the Port of Vancouver in particular is that it is the third-worst port in the world. Prince Rupert is the ninth-worst port. These are ports that could have huge potential. They could be in the top 50 ports in the world with no problem. They could be, and they should be. The potential is there for them to be able to do that. I do not see anything in the 108 or 109 pages of this bill that would actually make sure that those ports go from being at the bottom of the pile to the top of the pile.
224 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Jun/8/23 11:48:38 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, my colleague is absolutely right. That is the common-sense approach that we want to see from a piece of legislation like this. As I mentioned in my speech, my hope is that, if the government follows through and sets up some of these advisory committees, it will not just stack them with activists but will actually stack them with people who are working on the ground, who have boots on the ground and are trying to find solutions for a positive change, not only in production but also for the environment and for our sustainability, and who would make sure that we get the best deal for Canadians going forward.
They should also be trying to not only get those sea-cans shipped but also have them available to be used yet again for the next load, trying to get things done and dealt with in a timely manner. One of the problems we have is trying to get access to those cans so we can use them again and get products in. Then we could also send more products back out. What the member has proposed here would be a way to help speed that up and get a better result for Canadians.
207 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Jun/8/23 11:50:18 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, one of the biggest problems at the end of the day is that it is always the producer who absorbs the costs. The shipper will pass the costs on to the handler, who passes them on to the producer, the farmer. Farmers are always price-takers; they cannot pass costs on to anybody. However, everybody always passes the buck and passes the dollar on, and it is the farmers and the producers who end up paying for it. When we saw those massive delays, the costs kept piling up, but who ended up paying more? It was the farmers.
The quality of the grain that was being shipped was lessened; this was because of how much longer it took to get it somewhere so that it could be refined, dealt with and turned into the goods we need to consume. However, trying to get things dealt with in a timely manner is not addressed in this bill.
Again, there are many upgrades that need to happen so that we can avoid catastrophes like what happened in 2013 and 2015.
181 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- menumenu
- notificationsnotifications
- home
- mailmail
- searchsearch
