SoVote

Context: House Hansard - 267 - Dec/13/23

Mr. Ken Hardie (Fleetwood—Port Kells, Lib.)

Dec/13/23 4:10:40 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, on behalf of the chair of the Standing Committee on Fisheries and Oceans, the hon. member for Avalon, I will present the following two reports. I have the honour to present, in both official languages, the 12th report, entitled “Ecosystem Impacts and Management of Pinniped Populations”. For the folks at home, pinnipeds are sea lions. I also have the honour to present, in both official languages, the 13th report, entitled “Foreign Ownership and Corporate Concentration of Fishing Licences and Quota”. Pursuant to Standing Order 109, the committee requests that the government table a comprehensive response to these reports.

104 words

Mr. Clifford Small (Coast of Bays—Central—Notre Dame, CPC)

Dec/13/23 4:12:00 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to table the Conservative supplementary report on ecosystem impacts and management of pinniped populations. The report was completed because Conservative members of the Standing Committee on Fisheries and Oceans believe that the main report does not represent the urgency required to deal with the management of pinnipeds fast enough to save fish stocks on all three of Canada's coasts. Witnesses at this study, the mackerel study and the science study all stressed that paying lip service to pinniped predation, as the Liberals have over the last eight years, is simply not enough. We call on the government to commit to an education campaign to raise awareness of the ecological disaster that has occurred as a result of the imbalance caused by exploding seal and sea lion populations in Canada's coastal regions. This report also calls on the federal government to start lobbying in conjunction with its awareness campaign to gain access to international markets and promote pinniped products to help feed the millions of malnourished as part of Canada's foreign aid program. The committee heard it loud and clear. The time for action is now.

193 words

Mr. Mel Arnold (North Okanagan—Shuswap, CPC)

Dec/13/23 4:13:23 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, Conservative members on the Standing Committee on Fisheries and Oceans submitted our supplementary report to this study on foreign ownership and corporate concentration of fishing licences and quota because Canada's fisheries are shared common resources owned by the citizens of Canada. The Minister of Fisheries and Oceans and her department are mandated to manage and conserve Canada's fisheries for the sustained benefit and prosperity of Canadians, not foreign entities. In the committee study, we learned how the government is severely failing to protect Canadian harvesters who have been forced to pay for the government's failure. Laws and regulations on the east coast are not being enforced, leaving harvesters vulnerable to exploitation that should have and could have been shut down and eliminated years ago. On the west coast, the government has failed to even establish laws and regulations to protect harvesters and fisheries from foreign ownership and corporate concentration. The committee delivered recommendations to the government in 2019, but the government has failed to deliver on those recommendations. Conservatives hear Canadian harvesters on all coasts and see the threats they are facing. We will continue to fight to ensure that Canadians can access and earn prosperity from the shared resources of Canada's fisheries.

209 words

Mr. Ken Hardie (Fleetwood—Port Kells, Lib.)

Dec/13/23 4:14:49 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, as chair of the committee, I have the honour to present, in both official languages, the fifth interim report of the Special Committee on the Canada-People's Republic of China Relationship, entitled “The Exposure Of Canadian Investment Funds to Human Rights Violations in the People’s Republic Of China”. Pursuant to Standing Order 109, the committee requests that the government table a comprehensive response to this report.

73 words

Entitled

Hon. Mona Fortier (Ottawa—Vanier, Lib.)

Dec/13/23 4:14:57 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, I have the honour to present, in both official languages, the 14th report of the Standing Committee on International Trade, entitled “Non-Tariff Barriers to Trade: Some Canadian Perspectives”. I want to thank the members of the committee, as well as the committee clerk and the analysts, for their hard work.

56 words

Tariff

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

Dec/13/23 4:15:49 p.m.
Watch
Re: Bill C-371

moved for leave to introduce Bill C-371, An Act to amend the Canada Transportation Act (passenger rail service). He said: Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to rise today, as the NDP's transport critic, to table the rail passenger priority act. As many in this chamber know, Canada lags behind much of the world when it comes to passenger rail. One of the key reasons for that is because passenger trains in Canada frequently have to pull off and make way for freight trains. This results in poor on-time performance. This bill would amend the Canada Transportation Act to give passenger trains in Canada priority on the tracks, just as federal law does in the United States and as was recently recommended by the CEO of VIA Rail. Canada has the opportunity to seize the full potential of safe, convenient, climate-friendly passenger rail in this country. On Sunday, I will be setting out, by train, across our beautiful country, to speak with passengers and communities about how the rail passenger priority act is an important part of that endeavour. Merry Christmas.

184 words

Mr. Richard Cannings

Dec/13/23 4:17:43 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, I rise on a point of order. I wonder, if you canvass the room, whether there would be unanimous consent to allow some of us to present petitions that we have waiting for weeks to present. We have been faced with a series of motions for concurrence and other delays. I have citizens who have been asking me to present this petition and wondering why I have not been able to.

73 words

Mr. John Barlow (Foothills, CPC)

Dec/13/23 4:17:43 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, I move that the 10th report of the Standing Committee on Agriculture and Agri-Food, presented on Tuesday, June 13, be concurred in.

25 words

The Deputy Speaker

Dec/13/23 4:18:12 p.m.
Watch

Is there consent? Some hon. members: No.

7 words

Mr. Gord Johns

Dec/13/23 4:18:28 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, just on a similar point of order, the Canadian Association of Fire Chiefs has requested that I table this petition today. I am going to ask if you could canvass the House and allow some of us to table petitions on behalf of the volunteer firefighters who put their lives at risk to protect everybody in our communities, especially in rural Canada. I am hoping that you will get unanimous consent, so that we could table these petitions on behalf of these wonderful volunteers who sacrifice their time and energy for all of us.

96 words

Mr. Garnett Genuis

Dec/13/23 4:19:09 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, maybe it would be helpful for members to say that there are concurrence motions, which go for a maximum of three hours, and then there is an opportunity for petitions. If this debate concludes, there will be an opportunity for petitions. I know that there was an opportunity for petitions yesterday. Members have other ways they can table petitions. I hope that if we do not spend too much time on points of order, there will actually be an opportunity to get into petitions later in the day. We will see if the NDP actually puts up speakers on the concurrence motion. That will impact the timeline as well.

111 words

Mr. Taylor Bachrach

Dec/13/23 4:19:45 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, I would like to express my disappointment that I am unable to rise today to table a petition on behalf of several chambers of commerce in northwest B.C. and hundreds of small businesses across Canada, concerning the CEBA loans and partial loan forgiveness. This is something supported by the Canadian Federation for Independent Business and many other organizations. It is disappointing that, so late in the session, I am not able to table such an important petition.

80 words

Mr. Mike Morrice

Dec/13/23 4:20:18 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, I wonder if we could seek the House's unanimous consent. It sounds like there are three petitions that are particularly timely, one from the member for South Okanagan—West Kootenay, one from the member for Courtenay—Alberni and one from the member for Skeena—Bulkley Valley. I wonder if the House might consent to hear those three particularly timely petitions.

66 words

Mr. Garnett Genuis

Dec/13/23 4:20:51 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, respectfully, my understanding of the rules is that if we proceed to petitions, we are no longer in motions. Maybe there should be a discussion among House leaders about how to ensure we do not lose where we are in motions. We are in motions right now. We need to discuss this motion.

55 words

The Deputy Speaker

Dec/13/23 4:21:13 p.m.
Watch

I will go to the House leader for the NDP in a second, but if it is the will of the House to hear three petitions, we can hear those three petitions and then go back to the motion as it is predetermined here. All those opposed to the hon. member moving the motion, please say nay. An hon. member: Nay. The Deputy Speaker: The hon. House leader for the New Democratic Party.

73 words

Mr. Peter Julian

Dec/13/23 4:21:43 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, as you well know, allowing exceptional certain petitions in a timely manner to be presented is something that we do routinely. It is a courtesy that we offer to members of the House. We have a concurrence debate that has been moved. There is no doubt about that, but I would ask for unanimous consent to allow the member for Courtenay—Alberni to table the petition that he has referenced and that the Canadian Association of Fire Chiefs has asked him to present today.

87 words

The Deputy Speaker

Dec/13/23 4:22:12 p.m.
Watch

You are suggesting maybe just doing the one for Courtenay—Alberni? Some hon. members: No. The Deputy Speaker: I am already hearing no, so we are not going to revisit this. I would suggest to the hon. members that they can be tabled. They will be dated today as they were introduced into the House of Commons.

58 words

Mr. John Barlow

Dec/13/23 4:22:53 p.m.
Watch
Re: Bill C-234

Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the time that my colleagues have allowed me to discuss the study from the Standing Committee on Agriculture and Agri-Food, entitled “Grocery Affordability: Examining Rising Food Costs In Canada”. I will be splitting my time with the hon. member for Lambton—Kent—Middlesex, who has done a great deal of work on this subject specifically and certainly on the importance of the grocery code of conduct, for example, to try to address food affordability issues for Canadian consumers. I feel it is important to discuss this study here today because of some information that has come out most recently regarding food inflation and food costs for Canadians. When we completed this study in June this past spring, there was some pretty difficult information for Canadian consumers to hear on the increasing costs and increasing questions and concerns around affordability for Canadians and their inability to feed their families. However, that has become even more acute with the information that has come out recently regarding Canada's food price report, which came out last week. It revealed that, in 2024, Canadian families will pay $700 more for groceries than they did the previous year. Even the work we did on this initial study last spring is now almost out of date and obsolete, as food prices have continued to rise. We see now that food inflation will go up again next year between 5% and 7% depending on the commodity we are purchasing. As part of this study, we were waiting for an additional report from Dalhousie University and Dr. Sylvain Charlebois. The executive summary on the results of his study says that he and Dalhousie University have forecast that inflationary pressures and uncompetitive policies, like the carbon tax, on growing, processing and transporting food will increase the cost of wholesale food by 34% on average for all food categories by 2025.Thirty-four per cent is the increase in food costs that Canadian consumers are going to be facing over the next two years. This comes at a time when we have about two million Canadians relying on a food bank every single month, and when one in five Canadians is skipping meals because they cannot afford to put food on the table. However, I think the stats we heard in this study are even more concerning. As part of this study, we had testimony from Daily Bread Food Bank and Second Harvest. Their testimony was that, due to the dire situation, according to their figures, “food banks and other food-related programs across Canada served [5.1 million] people per month last year”. I know we are talking about two million Canadians relying on a food bank every single month, but when we include other food insecurity programs, like Second Harvest, that number goes to more than five million Canadians who are using a food security program or charity like a food bank every single month. Now, as a result of the additional information we have been provided, we are going to see higher food prices, up to maybe 34%. Again, from testimony from the Daily Bread Food Bank and Second Harvest, they are expecting the number of people using food banks and other food-related charities to climb to 8.2 million Canadians, which is roughly a 60% increase. Can members imagine that, because of inflationary policies and policies like the carbon tax, in Canada, where we have the ability to not only feed our own residents but help feed the world, we could have more than eight million Canadians relying on a regular basis on food banks and food charities to be able to feed their families? I find it to be unfathomable that in Canada we would be seeing those types of numbers. I hope everybody in the House will see those numbers as absolutely shocking. The Conservatives put forward a number of recommendations last June that we asked the government to follow-up on to try to address some of these concerning trends we are seeing. I would like to mention a couple of the recommendations we put forward that I thought were quite specific and would go a great way in addressing this crisis we are facing. Recommendation 1 said, “That the Government of Canada remove the carbon tax that is applied to all food inputs and production including all farm fuels and other...aspects of the food supply system.” Recommendation 2 was that the Government of Canada complete an economic assessment on the impact of the carbon tax and the clean fuel standard, carbon tax 2, and how this increase will affect the cost of food production, the price of food and the entire food supply chain. Recommendation 3 said, “That the Government of Canada immediately reverse its policy on front-of-package labelling.” There is only one thing we missed, which I think we would have added as a fourth recommendation had we known about it at the time. We now know the Liberal government is putting a ban on plastic food packaging, particularly for fresh fruit and vegetables, which will add an additional $8 billion to food costs. I want to really stress this point to everyone in the House and anyone who may be watching. This plastics ban is not the single-use plastics ban that the government has now been forced to reverse as a result of the decision at the court because it is unconstitutional. This is another ban on plastics. I want Canadians to picture this. As a result of this plastics ban on fresh fruit and vegetables, Canadians will be unable to purchase products they rely on, essential products they purchase every day, such as prepackaged salads, cucumbers and bananas. Many of these products are transported to Canada from outside of our country. We do not grow bananas in our climate. We have not quite gotten there with greenhouses. Because of these plastic packaging rules, companies outside of Canada will not upend their systems to meet an incomprehensible rule that they do not want to meet and cannot meet. Canadians will be going to the grocery stores and seeing empty grocery store shelves because we will no longer be able to import these products. The secondary concern, as a result of front-of-pack labelling and this plastics ban adding another $14 billion in costs on the food industry, is that Canadians are going to see skyrocketing food prices. We see the stats from Dr. Sylvain Charlebois on the carbon tax and other policies driving up food costs by 34%, and now we will add on other layers of bureaucracy. It is nonsensical and not based on science. The fresh produce industry cannot meet this deadline being imposed on it. At the same time, the Liberal loyalists in the Senate did everything they could to kill Bill C-234, which would save Canadian farmers $1 billion by 2030 on the carbon tax. We heard the Prime Minister in question period today basically questioning the carbon tax bills that farmers are sending us every single day. He said he does not think they are being forthright on what their carbon tax numbers are; he thinks they are too high. He should go out to every farm in Canada that is spending tens of thousands of dollars a month on carbon taxes to heat and cool barns, dry grains and operate family farms. These are the real-life consequences of the government's policies on carbon taxes and the impact they are having on everyday Canadians' ability to feed their families. I thought it was very important that we have an opportunity to address the study we tabled last June and try to update some of the numbers in the study that have now become obsolete as a result of the new data that has become available. Food prices are not only going up 5% to 7%. As a result of the data and the studies that have been done and as a result of the Liberals' carbon tax and other punitive policies, such as front-of-pack labelling and the ban on P2 plastics, Canadians are going to find it much more difficult to feed themselves, and millions more Canadians are going to be relying on food banks and charities. After eight years, the Prime Minister is simply not worth the cost.

1410 words

Mr. Kevin Lamoureux (Parliamentary Secretary to the Leader of the Government in the House of Commons, Lib.)

Dec/13/23 4:32:44 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, I heard the member for Foothills indicate that the price on pollution is going to increase the cost of groceries by 34% over the next two years. Can he explain how he can substantiate that?

37 words

Mr. John Barlow

Dec/13/23 4:33:06 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, I want to be clear. While I always appreciate the hon. member trying to put his own spin on things, what I said was that this is as a result of a study by Dr. Sylvain Charlebois of Dalhousie University. These are not numbers I am picking out of the sky. I will try to find the quote for the hon. member for Winnipeg North. It must drive him crazy to find out that there are numbers and we make decisions based on data. Dr. Sylvain Charlebois has forecast that inflationary pressures and uncompetitive policies, like the carbon tax, on growing, processing and transporting food will increase the cost of wholesale food by 34% on average for all food categories by 2025.

124 words