PRISM::Advent3b2 8.25
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
CANADA House of Commons Debates VOLUME 140 Ï NUMBER 125 Ï 1st SESSION Ï 38th PARLIAMENT OFFICIAL REPORT (HANSARD) Monday, September 26, 2005 (Part A) Speaker: The Honourable Peter Milliken CONTENTS (Table of Contents appears at back of this issue.) All parliamentary publications are available on the ``Parliamentary Internet Parlementaire´´ at the following address: http://www.parl.gc.ca 7979 HOUSE OF COMMONS Monday, September 26, 2005 The House met at 11 a.m. Electoral Officer for the issue of a writ for the election of a member to fill the vacancy. *** Prayers [Translation] Ï (1100) MESSAGE FROM THE SENATE [Translation] The Speaker: I have the honour to inform the House that a message has been received from the Senate informing this House BUSINESS OF THE HOUSE that the Senate has passed Bill S-37, an act to amend the Criminal Hon. Mauril Bélanger (Minister for Internal Trade, Deputy Code and the Cultural Property Export and Import Act, and Bill Leader of the Government in the House of Commons, Minister S-38, an act respecting the implementation of international trade responsible for Official Languages and Associate Minister of commitments by Canada regarding spirit drinks of foreign countries, National Defence, Lib.): Mr. Speaker, let me wish you and all my to which the concurrence of this House is desired. hon. colleagues a good session. Consultations have taken place with all the parties and, if you were to seek it, I believe that you would find unanimous consent for PRIVATE MEMBERS' BUSINESS the following motion. [English] Ï (1105) That on Tuesday, September 27, 2005, the hours of sitting and order of business shall [English] be those of a Wednesday. [Translation] AGRICULTURE The Speaker: Does the hon. Deputy Leader of the Government in Mr. Leon Benoit (Vegreville—Wainwright, CPC) moved: the House of Commons have the unanimous consent of the House to That, in the opinion of the House, the government should make available directly to move this motion? farmers the 2% strychnine solution. Some hon. members: Agreed. He said: Mr. Speaker, it is encouraging that we start off this session of Parliament with an issue that is probably the most The Speaker: The House has heard the terms of the motion. Is it important issue we will deal with in this Parliament. The issue of the pleasure of the House to adopt the motion? controlling the Richardson's ground squirrel, which is commonly Some hon. members: Agreed. known as the gopher, is an important issue for some of my constituents and for many people in western Canada. (Motion agreed to) I have been pursuing this issue for many years. When I first *** brought it to the House many members laughed that such an issue [English] would be brought before this place. The fact is that the Richardson's VACANCY ground squirrel causes damage of up to $200 million a year in western Canada. We do not know the exact cost but $200 million is a SURREY NORTH rough estimate which seems to make sense when one considers the The Speaker: It is my duty to inform the House that a vacancy crop damage, the extra labour involved in trying to control the has occurred in the representation in the House of Commons for the Richardson's ground squirrel with the limited and ineffective electoral district of Surrey North in the province of British Columbia products that are available, the damage to equipment and machinery by reason of the death of our dear colleague, Mr. Chuck Cadman. due to the holes and the mounds made by gophers, and the livestock that have to be put down because they broke their legs stepping into Pursuant to subsection 28(1) of the Parliament of Canada Act, I a gopher hole. In a bad year, $200 million is certainly a realistic have addressed on Tuesday, July 19, 2005, a warrant to the Chief number and it shows the importance of this issue. 7980 COMMONS DEBATES September 26, 2005 Private Members' Business Two hundred million dollars is a cost that farmers simply cannot One statement is that there are two products available to farmers, stand to bear on top of the other increased costs that they have felt one being a premix that is done by the municipalities. In fact, that over the past months and years. Along with skyrocketing costs, has not been available over the past year. prices of their crops have been declining steadily. The price of wheat, barley, canola, peas and all commodities are as low as I have ever The other statement is that there is a premix that is done in the seen them in the time I have been farming. Toronto area which is then shipped out west. This product is simply At the same time, due to a move made by the government in 1993, mixed with farmers' grain and then shipped back. It is extremely carried out over the last few years, a move that removed the only expensive. The department says that it is an effective product for effective control of the Richardson's ground squirrel, farmers have control. If one were to talk to my neighbours and people across the been forced to bear this extra cost of possibly $200 million a year. Prairies they would hear that it is not effective. that it is extremely That is a lot of money, and it is a serious problem. expensive and that it is impractical. I will just read my motion for the record. It is simple, direct and All farmers are asking for is to have this 2% strychnine solution short. returned to them so they can mix it with their own grain and That, in the opinion of the House, the government should make available directly effectively control this terrible pest that costs up to $200 million or to farmers the 2% strychnine solution. more in a bad year. It should not be that difficult for the government I get a bit uncomfortable standing before the House knowing that to deliver on this. I certainly hope the government will be supporting Canadians are listening to us talk about using a poison to control the motion as we go along in the process to adopt the motion. gophers. Quite frankly, with the kind of damage that has been done, they have to be controlled in some fashion. The strychnine solution If the motion is passed, the issue will be given to the appropriate mixed by farmers themselves is the only effective product that could committee which I assume will be the agriculture committee as it is be made available. That is why it is important that we return this the committee that makes sense. It would deal with it, put legislation product to farmers. together and then have the legislation once again come before House and hopefully passed by the House. The farmers would then have Back in about 1997, I put forward two motions for the production this product returned to them, a product that would safely control the of papers. The Department of Agriculture provided about 200 pages Richardson's ground squirrel, commonly called the gopher. of information that was supposed to explain why it had removed this product from the market in the first place. Quite frankly, it was embarrassing and completely unacceptable. The reasons the What has happened with this product simply demonstrates what government gave for removing this product were completely happens all too often with this government. I hate to step in here unconvincing, and that is putting it mildly. right away sounding so critical of the government. I will acknowl- edge that over the past 100 years Liberal governments have provided There were a few complaints by a few animal rights people and a some good government from time to time. They have not always few complaints that non-targeted species had been poisoned, and provided bad government but unfortunately they have not provided particularly that the poison had been used illegally on neighbours' good government over the past 12 years. dogs and that type of thing. A lot of other substances could be used to poison a neighbour's dog if someone chose to do that. Since it is In its 12 year mandate the government has too often used the same against the law to do that why do we not uphold the law instead of knee-jerk type of reaction that it has used in the strychnine problem. removing this product that is so important to farmers? That is the This demonstrates part of the problem with the government. It issue and that is the issue the government has not dealt with. simply made a decision based on input from fewer than a dozen Just to show how unimportant agriculture is to the government I people, according to the papers which I received under production of would like to point out that this issue is being spearheaded by the papers, who had complained about this product. It did no evaluation Minister of Health instead of the Minister of Agriculture. I of the cost to farmers which is why I cannot give a definite number understand that both departments are involved in making this on the costs to farmers in terms of damage to crops, machinery decision but the Department of Agriculture has a lot more damage, livestock having to be destroyed and that type of thing. A information on this product and on its importance than anyone else. study has never been done. This demonstrates how the government It should have received the information from the Department of operates.