Jeremy Patzer
Swift Current—Grasslands—Kindersley, Saskatchewan · Conservative · Canada
“Mr. Speaker, when I rose in the House previously in question period, I asked the Minister of Public Safety about charges being stayed against two fentanyl traffickers who were arrested and in court in Swift Current. Police found 17.5 pounds of fentanyl in their car, and their charges were stayed.”
“This person was out on bail for a previous drug possession and trafficking charge for a street value of $125,000. This is getting insane. These are the kinds of things that people are seeing on the streets.”
“The “earliest reasonable opportunity and on the least onerous conditions” is the main theme of what Bill C-75 has meant for people like drug traffickers. Let us take a look at a few other cases in and around Saskatchewan. On April 8, another individual was found with 51 grams of fentanyl.”
“Mr. Speaker, the common theme we see with the Liberals is that they go easy on criminals, and then all of a sudden they introduce all these new laws that try to make up for their own undoing of previous laws that were in place and would have helped deal with a lot of this. There are other chronic issues that are at play here.”
“The borders continue to be a sore spot for drugs coming in. Basically zero containers are scanned coming into Canada, so all kinds of drugs and who knows what else are pouring into our country, and it is putting our citizens at risk and in danger. How else do we end up with 17.5 pounds of fentanyl getting on the streets down Highway 1?”
“Madam Speaker, it is always a privilege to be able to rise on behalf of the great people of southwest and west central Saskatchewan, and to be able to do so here in the month of June. We know June is the graduation season for all of the kids in elementary school who are moving up to high school.”
The complete record
Every one of 281 lines we hold for Jeremy Patzer, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 5 of 6.
“I cannot even read the hundreds and the cents because it is going up way too fast. The share of federal debt for each and every person in the House and every single Canadian is $30,457. The growth in Canada's debt per day, without the government introducing any new spending, is $109,863,013.70. That is every single day without the government doing anything. When the Liberals start pouring more inflationary spending on the fire, imagine how that number will be impacted and how it will change. Those are the numbers that every single member of this House should be paying more attention to. If they did, they would understand them, particularly those on the government side. On this side, we pay attention to those numbers a lot.”
“Mr. Speaker, it is always an honour and a privilege to rise in the House of Commons to speak on behalf of the great people of southwest and west central Saskatchewan. Before I begin, I would like to give a quick happy birthday shout-out to the member for Cariboo—Prince George , a wonderful member of this House. There are lots of family ties between people in southwest Saskatchewan and people in his part of B.C. I know there is a flow of people that way. Happy birthday to him. He is a great member. Before I get into the substance of my speech, it is really important, whenever we talk about anything that has to deal with the state of the economy in Canada, that we point out the total number of debt in Canada. Right now, Canada's federal debt is $1,276,208,890,000. Now it is $891,000, $892,000, $893,000.”
“Mr. Speaker, there is an old proverb that says that the road to hell is paved with good intentions. Canadian workers are getting sick and tired of the Prime Minister 's good intentions. The best predictor of the future is the past, so let us take a look at the Prime Minister's record. His last act as the chair of Brookfield was to move the company headquarters out of Canada and into the United States, into the welcoming arms of President Trump. I guess it is pretty clear that the Prime Minister will continue to sell out Canadian workers to the U.S. Is that not right?”
“Mr. Speaker, I am wondering if my colleague can elaborate a bit on what the situation would look like for someone who committed an offence here in Canada but also committed the same offence overseas. I am wondering what that would look like and how this bill and the court system would handle it. Would it create a weird two-tier system that could be problematic for victims trying to receive proper justice?”
“Mr. Speaker, certainly we agree that moving the trials to the civilian courts would provide victims with, hopefully, a little more certainty that the proceedings could go ahead. However, there is a concern, because I do not see anywhere in the bill the Liberals' trying to address the lack of judges and the lack of courtroom space. I would hate for somebody to run up against a situation where they are not able to get to the end of a sentencing or a trial within a given time frame, and the charges are tossed because they were not able to get through the proceedings in a timely manner. I am just wondering whether the member has any concerns about that.”
“Mr. Speaker, I really appreciate this question from the most notorious member in the House of Commons. He is a great friend, and he is a terrific MP for his region. We had a terrible problem of municipalities not being able to get that money back. We know the feds are not going to do it because they have a rabid ideology that is going to prevent that from happening. They want to see these municipalities punished, because that drove the need for them to implement the carbon tax in the first place. It has made life way more unaffordable for people in rural Canada because we have greater distances to travel, whether for personal, business or industry reasons. It is a huge problem. The industrial carbon tax is a big problem for RMs as well, with the heavy equipment they use and the big projects they—”
“Mr. Speaker, the problem the member is ignoring is that Quebec does not produce every single thing it needs within the province. Quebec, like Canada, has to import goods. If goods coming from European countries have an industrial carbon tax or if things coming from elsewhere in Canada are impacted by the industrial carbon tax, people are going to pay it. It may not show on the invoice, but it is baked into the price, as I said in my speech. That has been long noted by many people. Because it is a hidden cost, we cannot fully quantify what it is doing because the number is not immediately available, but we can see how the costs keep going up. As the manufacturers have to pay their bills, they can see it, but they do not show that number when they have to increase the cost of products they are sending out the door for consumers.”
“Mr. Speaker, as the member knows, agriculture is very much a trade-exposed, global market-driven industry. To resolve the tariffs, the Prime Minister has to get involved. Beyond that, as I was alluding to in my speech, the cost of everything at the farm gate has gone up, and it is innovations by farmers that have largely driven progress in agriculture, whether it is on the manufacturing side or in best farm practices. The issue with the industrial carbon tax is that it is a hidden cost for producers when they have to buy their next piece of machinery. It is also a cost on transportation because road equipment and the production of pavement and concrete, things like that, are exposed to the industrial carbon tax. It creates a problematic scenario for them.”
“If the consumer carbon tax continued to go up, it would have been adding 21¢ per litre. Even though that is not happening right now, the industrial carbon tax went up, and it is spreading those increased costs throughout the economy in place of the consumer tax. However, it is a hidden cost because we are dealing with food inflation, a cost of living crisis that is being borne by our manufacturers, by the consumer, by our farmers and by people who are the ones to create jobs in this economy. It is devastating. It is time for the Liberals to vote for our motion, which would get rid of the industrial carbon tax.”
“We are talking about ordinary Canadians, who have to pay higher prices through inflation and then turn around and pay higher taxes on everything else. At every stage, the government benefits, but everyone else is worse off. I know the Liberals are going to stand up and say they scrapped the carbon tax, and they sort of did. They scrapped the consumer tax that people paid on their home heating and fuel to fill up their vehicles, but as I explained, the industrial carbon tax is truly a consumer carbon tax by another name. Not only did the Liberals keep it, but they are raising the rate for this industrial carbon tax. Here is something else to think about: The industrial carbon tax was matching the consumer carbon tax, which added 17¢ per litre before it was removed.”
“The costs of producing food and taking care of cattle are borne by the producers. Eventually, the people in the grocery store will then have to pay higher prices. What it takes to build key infrastructure in this country shows an impact of bad policies like the industrial carbon tax. The problem begins with the Liberal government, which has an attitude that says, “For everything else in life, there is a taxpayer,” or “Tax first, ask questions later”. That sets the tone from the beginning, but there is always a cost in doing that, and it eventually gets passed down to the consumer. The difference is that, unlike a greedy government, Canadian businesses are forced to charge more while trying to survive. At the end of the day, the consumer gets hit from all directions.”
“We then add on the industrial carbon tax, which has an impact on these companies up front. There is also a trickle-down impact for other parts of the economy and for the great farm machinery manufacturers on the Prairies as well. I spoke with a general manager of one of these great companies the other day, and he talked about how the industrial tax is devastating for many reasons. However, it is not just Canada that has one. I recognize that other countries around the world have them, but those are countries that have to import products in order to build the products they make. The industrial carbon tax is largely a hidden cost for them. It is one that they have to bear. It is also one that they then have to pass along to the consumer, so the consumer has to pay higher prices.”
“Previous and current Liberal policies are having devastating impacts on companies. For example, Evraz steel in Regina had to cut its labour force in half, largely thanks to bad Liberal policy, which has made sure that no projects can proceed in Canada. While these industries already have to deal with tariffs, the Canadian government is still taxing them more at the same time. The Liberals across the way should ask themselves whether it makes sense to put another tariff, basically, on top of the tariff already hitting Canadian companies. If they would start to think of it that way, maybe they would finally support Canadian jobs and drop their industrial carbon tax. If there are no major projects to build in Canada, then no Canadian steel is needed, which means fewer jobs.”
“Instead of being preachy with farmers, the Liberals can learn a lot from the way farmers were able to balance the economy and the environment, and they should follow the farmers' lead. There are some other things they could learn as well. The amount of work that went into building major projects, such as the national railway or Gardiner Dam, was done without the need of, for example, the Major Projects Office. It was a different time back then. These days, those projects that support my region of the country would probably have been built with obstacles for industry, such as the Liberals' carbon tax and other policies devastating for the west. Today, while debating this motion, I am going to focus on the industrial carbon tax on steel, manufacturing and heavy industry. It is causing destruction among many of our once great companies.”
“We are seeing a modern miracle of higher yields. These farms are producing more with less. Soil conservation, technology and best practices have improved over time in response to the dry climate. (1645) In the past, this happened without government intervention. Now it is happening in spite of a Liberal government that has made it more difficult for the ag industry as a whole. The Liberals should let farmers do what they do best while they focus on resolving China's tariffs against Canadian canola products and yellow peas. It has been tragic for the farmers to do more with less and have a better harvest this year, only to watch their profits get wasted away and wiped out by tariffs.”
“Farmers have always understood how important it is to take care of their land and respect nature, because it goes hand in hand with their success in business. They do not need to reinvent the wheel or listen to any lectures from the government. The success story of the Palliser Triangle has been happening for over a century. Over time, each new generation has built on that foundation. There were, of course, some setbacks over time, and one in particular was the Great Depression. We saw great droughts. We saw tremendous topsoil loss because of drought, blowing winds and some of the agricultural practices of the time. It was on the recovery side of World War I, but also at the onset of World War II. In more recent years, there has actually been less rainfall in Saskatchewan than even in the dirty thirties.”
“Ultimately, farmers settled the area and started to build their farms based on two criteria: proximity not only to the bit of water that was there but also to the rail line. I am sure members are wondering why I am giving them a brief history lesson on Saskatchewan. It took great vision and incredibly unbreakable will to be able to build our province, our towns and our communities. Somehow the farmers managed to make it work even in the Palliser Triangle. They had a strong work ethic, combined with creativity and resourcefulness, which did the impossible. Through innovation and improved techniques, agriculture expanded and overcame major challenges against all the odds. All of this happened without any intervention from the government trying to impose its radical vision on society.”
“It ties into the North Saskatchewan River up by Prince Albert, and from there it proceeds to Hudson Bay. This phenomenon is known as the Laurentian continental divide, the irony of which is not lost on me, but from our perspective out west, it is always an interesting name any time the word “Laurentian” gets mixed in there. I talk a lot about farming because my riding is predominantly rural and heavily agricultural. My riding alone has a huge geographical area, and most of it is covered by the Palliser Triangle, which John Palliser described as more or less an arid desert and unsuitable for crops. Southwest to west central Saskatchewan falls right in the middle of the Palliser Triangle, yet for a long time now we have had farmers working everywhere with unbelievably successful crops. What happened?”
“In my neck of the woods, the original pioneers and settlers thought the area was uninhabitable because of the unforgiving landscape, the volatile weather and the lack of surface water. At the time, John Palliser reported that the region is a desert “which can never be expected to be occupied by settlers.” There are two main waterways in western Saskatchewan: the Frenchman River, close to where I grew up, and the South Saskatchewan River, which is just to the north of where I live now. This is where things get interesting. The Frenchman River flows south through southwest Saskatchewan and eventually ties into the Missouri River, then the Mississippi River and down to the Gulf of Mexico. The South Saskatchewan River, which is not even a two-hour drive north from the Frenchman River, flows north.”
“We have a lot of common sense and common decency. We are surrounded by natural beauty and take good care of the land. We are the breadbasket of the world. It is an especially good year for the Roughriders. They are having a great season, being at the top of the league at this point in the CFL. As we give thanks for our history, we are looking ahead to accomplish more in the future. I will proudly defend the best interests of my home province of Saskatchewan, the west and all of Canada. That is what our Conservative motion today is all about. In Saskatchewan, we are known for many things, whether it is producing the vast majority of Canada's pulse exports, leading in canola growth or weathering life in the Palliser Triangle. On that last one, I cannot express enough how much of a feat that is.”
“Mr. Speaker, before I get started, I would like to say I will be splitting my time with the member for Acadie—Annapolis . It is always an honour to speak on behalf of the great people in southwest and west central Saskatchewan. I would like to take a quick moment here to acknowledge that this is an exceptional week, because on Monday, the 22nd, it was my daughter Jada's 13th birthday. We had a great celebration this weekend with her before I left. I would also like to note that Saskatchewan is celebrating 120 years in Confederation. As a province, we built ourselves up rapidly and continue to grow through generations of hard work underneath the wide open prairie sky. People in Saskatchewan are tough enough to overcome the coldest winters and the longest droughts. Prairie resilience is a thing.”
“Mr. Speaker, I heard the member talk in her speech about how the Liberals are working alongside industry. What we have seen from the government, as a result of the policy direction it has taken us in over the last 10 years, is that $63 billion in investment has left Canada so far this year. I am just wondering what the member's plan is to try to bring that $63 billion back. I am wondering which bad Liberal policies from the last 10 years she is willing to scrap to get that money back.”
“Mr. Speaker, it did not take long for Canadians to see the public safety minister fail multiple times at his job. In just four months, we found out that he needs to recuse himself from certain discussions on border security and that he is playing politics with the firearms confiscation program that he admitted will not work. Now he has lost 600 foreign nationals with criminal records in Canada who were ordered to be deported. The public safety minister cannot deliver public safety for Canadians. He is already at three strikes. How come he is not out? When will the Prime Minister fire this failed minister?”
“Mr. Speaker, since 2015, police-reported hate crimes are up 258% across Canada, anti-Semitic hate crimes are up 416%, and hate crimes against south Asians are up 377%. We have also seen well over 100 churches burned down. It would seem to me that there has been a general lack of enforcing the law but also making sure that people who commit these crimes actually go to jail and stay in jail. Does the member not agree that it would have been better to reform bail now, as opposed to doing something like this when there are already existing elements to the Criminal Code that criminalize hate propaganda, threats, intimidation and obstruction?”
“We are seeing very minimal returns on canola now with the price point the way it is, and then we add this other trade irritant. We need the Prime Minister to take this seriously, and the relief steps they are taking just do not cut it.”
“Mr. Speaker, Kevin Hursh, who is a producer from southwest Saskatchewan, writes for The Western Producer on a regular basis. The latest article he wrote was regarding net farm profitability. The whole point of the article is to show, with current prices, input costs and the way things are, what the most profitable and what the biggest-loss crops are. Right at the very bottom of that list is yellow peas, and yellow peas are the subject of tariffs from China. Going back just a year, yellow peas did quite well, and now they are down at the bottom of the list. Adding this trade irritant with China is going to further exasperate the yellow pea growers. That is one of the crops that actually grows quite well in southwest Saskatchewan.”
“We know that with China, the only way this is going to be resolved is through our country's Prime Minister and the leader of China meeting. That is the only way we are going to be able to get this resolved. The Prime Minister has not gone to China. Instead, he has been going off to Europe and other countries for, more or less, fake trade announcements or fake announcements of things that we already have in place with these countries. I am just wondering if this time the parliamentary secretary can tell the producers of Saskatchewan very clearly when these tariffs will be removed.”
“With China being a major export market, we have seen 100% tariffs and 76% tariffs on various products from China. We have also had a trade relationship with India that goes up and down. There are other markets around the world that have been on-again, off-again for us, so it is important that those export markets remain available to our producers. We hear the Prime Minister talk about how amazing he is going to be for our relationships with China and other countries because he has all this fantastic experience. At the end of the day, he has been in power now for over six months, and these tariffs still exist. Some of these tariffs were recently introduced. It is not even like they have been on for a long time. They were recently introduced, and the Prime Minister has not done anything about them.”
“It is extremely important that the government understand how important agriculture is, not just to the Saskatchewan economy, but to the general economy as a whole. One in eight jobs in Canada come from the agriculture sector. Numbers like these underscore just how important agriculture is to Saskatchewan. I represent southwest and west central Saskatchewan, right near the heart of what is called the Palliser Triangle in Canada. It is an area that was supposed to be uninhabitable for man. However, within that very region, the farmers of Saskatchewan and Alberta have been able to essentially feed the world. Looking at the numbers of the various kinds of crops being produced, it is important for the government to understand just how important the export market is.”
“I just want to take a few moments to go over some key statistics from Saskatchewan producers and Canadian producers and what they mean for the world. Canada contributes 22% of global exports of canola meal, 21% of global exports of canola oil, 17% of canola seed exports, 37% of lentils exports across the world and 27% of global dry pea exports. When we look at Canada at large, 87% of Canada's lentils come from Saskatchewan, 85% of our chickpeas come from Saskatchewan and 55% of Canada's canola is grown in Saskatchewan. That is why I brought up the issue of tariffs on canola oil, canola meal, canola crush and on our peas, yellow peas in particular. They are all being tariffed by China.”
“Mr. Speaker, before I get the chance to follow up on the ag minister 's non-answer to my previous question, I would like to say that this month, my home province of Saskatchewan celebrates its 120th anniversary of joining the Confederation. From humble beginnings out on the wild frontier, we have seen a lot of growth since then. Farmers have played an essential part in that every step of the way. We continue to be the breadbasket of the world, and we will always be proud of the people who get up early, stay out in the field for late nights and work all year-round to feed Canada and feed the world. I give my thanks to the farmers and the producers for everything they do. It has been a long time since we have had an ag minister from Saskatchewan or western Canada who has first-hand experience of what prairie farmers face in their industry.”
“We are also seeing with crop insurance that, because there have been so many bad years consecutively, farmers are unable to get the coverage out of their insurance, because the five-year average has now dropped so low because of the consecutive years of bad crops. The government needs to do a better job of engaging with producers in Saskatchewan in the breadbasket of Canada to get a better handle on understanding what is really going on in agriculture.”
“Mr. Speaker, as the member was finishing her remarks, she talked about AgriStability. One of the largest complaints that I get in my office from producers, besides the government's inactivity on trade, is the AgriStability program and how it just does not ever trigger when they need it to trigger. Particularly out in the Prairies, with how much larger our farms are getting, and particularly compared to farms out here in Ontario, Quebec and Atlantic Canada, the margins just do not work. We do not see people triggering. There are a lot more people who are leaving the program than choosing to be in the program, because they are just seeing it as a financial loss.”
“They want to know where the market is going to be. Right now they are seeing no respect from the government. I am wondering why the government continues to turn its back on farmers, especially when they are responsible for 7.5% of Canada's GDP.”
“It is also about 7.5% of the Canadian GDP. When we look at what that means for the Canadian economy and what happens when there is a 100% tariff on canola meal, canola oil and yellow peas, and another 76% tariff applied on canola seed, by one of the largest export markets that we have for our product, everyone can understand why that is a big problem. We continue to hear from the government that it is a new government, yet we continue to see nothing but the same. We see that it has a hands-off approach to trade. We would think one of the first priorities of a national government that is trying to differentiate itself from the previous government would be to take this seriously, be proactive in its approach and go and get this done. As the harvest is coming in, farmers are looking for some certainty.”
“We were waiting to see whether anybody would do something. Nobody did, until the Premier of Saskatchewan took the initiative to arrange meetings and go to China about a week and a half ago. A member of the Liberal caucus did go with him, but it was not the Prime Minister and not even the agriculture minister . When it comes to trying to get a deal done with China to try to remove the tariffs, it is going to be only the Prime Minister who has the ability and authority to do that. It will not be whoever the government decides to send. It is going to be only the Prime Minister who is able to get the deal done. We still have not seen the Prime Minister take that very important step of going to get the issue resolved. Agriculture accounts for about one in eight or one in nine jobs in the Canadian economy.”
“We would like to maybe see a little more consistent rain, but over the duration of the summer, I think everyone is quite content with where things are at. That leads me to the reason I am here today: the response to a question I asked the government about what it was doing with the tariffs that have been imposed on Canadian canola oil, canola meal and canola seed, as well as on our yellow peas, by the Communist regime in Beijing. Over the summer, we were waiting for the Prime Minister to perhaps go to China and work on that relationship. He has bragged openly in the past about how he is going to do things differently, how he has great connections there and how he is going to be a great advocate for Canada with China. I know that over the summer, the farmers and producers in my riding were waiting to see that happen. It did not happen.”
“Mr. Speaker, it is an honour to be able to rise in the chamber for the first time since we returned from the summer break. We had a great summer in southwest Saskatchewan and in the western part of the province. Farmers have been working really hard. I want to give a quick shout-out to all the farmers and producers who are bringing the harvest in. It has been another interesting growing season. Some areas have had an extension of the many years of drought; some are up to 10 consecutive years of drought now. There have also been substantive amounts of rain in other parts of the province and the riding, where farmers who maybe seeded a little later this year are seeing a tremendous yield in their crops. They are really grateful for the way the growing season has been.”
“Mr. Speaker, I know my colleague obviously has a background in law enforcement. If the bill goes through as the Liberals intend it to, with a Canada Post worker opening mail and discovering drugs, what kind of a weird position would that put a Canada Post worker in, as opposed to a law enforcement officer in that situation?”
“The problem is that it is not in Canada. It is in the United States of America. Canadians will have to wait for a Conservative government to support our world-class energy sector that will cut bad Liberal policies, build a strong economy to get the job done and restore the promise of our great country.”
“Mr. Speaker, it has been six months and the so-called new Liberal government seems like it is the same as the old one. At first, the Prime Minister sounded different from Justin Trudeau, but we are finding, as time goes by, that the Liberals are using the same old Liberal playbook. He hinted about a fast track to build a pipeline. What actually happened? He created a major project bureaucracy instead to try to fast-track big projects. Not a single pipeline is on the major projects list, as the Liberals have reannounced previous projects that are already under construction. They kept in place bad anti-energy policies from the Trudeau era: Bill C-69 , Bill C-48 , the oil and gas production cap and the industrial carbon tax, to name a few. Enbridge, a Canadian energy company, is building a $700-million pipeline project.”
“Mr. Speaker, the RCMP knows where thousands of these drug labs are across Canada, so I do not think it would be that hard of a process to get the warrant needed to search for products. Does the member not agree that there are already measures in place that can be used? If the government had the will in the tone it is setting for how it treats drugs in this country, that would be of great help as well.”
“Mr. Speaker, Canadian farmers work hard to feed the world, but they are taking losses from trade barriers imposed by China. Saskatchewan normally exports close to $1 billion in peas to them, but thanks to action by the Liberal Prime Minister , our exports are dropping. Saskatchewan farmers have already lost out on half of their pea exports to China, and now there is a 100% tariff on the rest. The Prime Minister promised to be different from Justin Trudeau on trade, so why is he still doing nothing to help our farmers out?”
“Mr. Speaker, I really enjoyed the member's speech. In particular, at the start of it, he was talking about the issue of Canadians of convenience. When I meet with people back home, especially people who have immigrated to Canada, they had to work hard. They had to prove they were solvent and had the means to be able to be a contributing member of society. When we look at the bill, we see what the Liberals are doing with what it means to become a Canadian citizen. They have really cheapened what it takes to become a Canadian citizen. I am just wondering if my colleague has any thoughts on what the Liberals are doing with the bill in really cheapening what it takes and what it means to become Canadian.”
“The Prime Minister needs to stop with the fancy words and act on repealing the Liberal anti-energy policies immediately. Canadians need a government that will approve energy infrastructure, sell to our allies and deliver paycheques to our people. Now that the Prime Minister's elbows are clearly down, it is time for him to stand up and get back to work.”
“Mr. Speaker, Canadian oil and gas is the key to our prosperity. Ten years of Liberal anti-energy laws have kept it in the ground and stopped pipelines from getting built, including laws like Bill C-69 , the “no new pipelines” act; Bill C-48 , the shipping ban; the oil and gas production cap; and the industrial carbon tax. It is impossible to ignore the national consensus to get rid of these bad Liberal laws. There was an election this spring in which the Prime Minister promised big things. Then we heard fancy speeches from him in Calgary. He also met with the premiers in Saskatoon. Parliament has already been sitting for four weeks. We just hosted the G7 meetings in Alberta with key energy allies, yet we still have not seen any announcements for new projects or proposals.”
“Would the member not agree that if ministers were actually accountable for their departments, a lot of this would not have happened?”
“Mr. Speaker, I think part of the issue that we are seeing with the debate today, with Liberal members giving their speeches, is that there seems to be a bit of a refusal to acknowledge that a pattern has existed with scandal within government. We know Justin Trudeau had multiple ethics reports with his name on them. The minister from Beauséjour has a couple; he made headlines a few times for some very notable slip-ups and conflicts. We have the former minister of international trade. She had some shortcomings on the ethics side. There are many instances. It is not like the government failures were just one little problem here. There seems to be a constant lack of accountability. We see ministers, even members of the Liberal Party, get up and say they cannot blame the minister. Well, no, ministerial accountability is an important piece.”
“Mr. Speaker, Saskatchewan is responsible for over one-fifth of the world's canola exports, with China being one of the largest buyers. The Communist regime in Beijing implemented 100% tariffs on canola oil and meal, but there has been radio silence from the Prime Minister . Farmers plan their crop rotations years in advance, and they have had to ride out this trade war all on their own. Will the Prime Minister prioritize our farmers for once and end China's tariffs on our canola, or is he too compromised from Brookfield's quarter-billion dollar loan from a Chinese bank?”
“Mr. Speaker, I want to thank my colleague for that great question. It should be really simple for the Prime Minister to say he was not part of that and demand the money back. It should be really easy for him to do that if is he is as new and as clean as Liberals say he is. However, because he has been behind the scenes for four or five years, I think it puts him in a tough spot to be the one to demand the money. That is why the opposition is holding the government accountable with motions like this, demanding the money be recovered on behalf of the taxpayer. What happened was ridiculous, it was criminal, and people want to see accountability not just for Kristian Firth but for the government.”