SoVote

Decentralized Democracy

Member of Parliament

Martin Shields

  • Member of Parliament
  • Member of Parliament
  • Conservative
  • Bow River
  • Alberta
  • Voting Attendance: 65%
  • Expenses Last Quarter: $127,198.82

  • Government Page
Context: House Hansard - 113 - Oct/19/22
Mr. Martin Shields (Bow River, CPC)
  • Oct/19/22 7:57:04 p.m.
  • Watch
Madam Speaker, it is great to be in the House tonight and dealing with this topic. I am glad to see the parliamentary secretary for health, and since I have asked a question about health, we will start with a bit about health. There was the warning label on ground beef and pork. There was no warning label on the same cuts of beef and pork when they were whole, but all of a sudden there was a warning label on the ground meat itself. Maybe it was the knife. Maybe it was the grinding that made it. I do not know what the science was, but a couple of people have mentioned analogies to me. They said we might have a whole log that had no warning label on it, yet if we cut it up into a two-by-four, it might get a warning label. Maybe it is the saw. What about a potato? If it was whole and baked it could have no warning label, but if we turned it into mashed potatoes, it might get a warning label. Maybe it is the utensils. The science must have changed, because the Liberals reversed it. We did not know what the science was before, but the science changed, so they reversed it. They did not tell us what the reversing science was. Let us go into a bit more about health in the ag sector, because it is huge in the sense that it directly affects ag. Is there a lot of stress in the ag sector? There absolutely is. Have members seen the suicide rate in the ag sector? They should check it out. In my riding we have irrigation, and a lot of irrigation. Four per cent of the land produces almost 20% of the Alberta ag GDP. Electricity is used to produce irrigation. Electricity is not a fuel, so there is not an exemption for fuel. As a business expense, it is very small: less than part of 1%. It is an inflation carbon tax. The carbon tax takes literally millions away from my ag producers. Does this cause stress and is it a health problem? Absolutely. Now, the Liberals want to triple the carbon tax. It is not going to be returned; it is gone. That means there is a ripple effect on the machinery producers and the communities. Wherever they buy, there is less money there. Stress is there in the ag sector. The warning label on beef was just one of the stresses, but the tripling of the carbon tax and the cost of irrigation, which is huge in my riding, is another problem for health in my ag producers. The minister announced a 30% fertilizer reduction by 2030. Where was the science? Where was the baseline? Where was the consultation with the ag organizations, with the wheat organizations or with the fertilizer or ag producers? Why is the minister not talking about it being voluntary now? Does this create stress and a health issue in the ag sector? Absolutely it does, because there were no consultations and no credit was given to incredible, world-leading Canadian ag producers whose work is science-based, capturing carbon, reducing fertilizer use and using other practices that are world leading. There is no science behind this 30% reduction of emissions. These are world-leading ag producers who are doing it. They will continue to do it. The government's goal, which it now calls voluntary even though it was not, was to reduce ag production by $20 billion a year. Canadian food security would go down if it did this, and export production would go down. Where is the science, and what about the stress on their mental health of tripling the carbon tax on the ag producers, especially in the irrigation sector in my riding?
642 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border