Randy Hoback
Prince Albert, Saskatchewan · Conservative · Canada
“This tax also makes our manufacturers, suppliers and international traders uncompetitive in the global marketplace. What do I mean by that? The reality is that these are costs Canadian manufacturers and Canadian producers face, but their competitors around the world do not.”
“They did not need to be the ones doing it all by themselves. Keep in mind that we produce 2% of global emissions, yet we thought we were taking on the world and we are trying to find a way to solve 100% of global emissions.”
“I never got the tractor stuck. That was always my dad. I will say that, or at least that is what I will admit to. Talking about stress leads to what we are talking about today. Canadians are stressed. They are financially stressed. They are feeling the impact of costs going up.”
“To farmer friends in my riding, across Saskatchewan and across Canada, slow down, take a breath, relax and be safe out there. To those who are working in agricultural districts or driving down those roads, remember that those farmers are working really hard and they are have time constraints. Give them space on the road.”
“Mr. Speaker, I know the sincerity of the hon. member's heart. His approach to it is one way of approaching it. Is it the right way? Is it the most efficient way? That is where we would differ. The need is there. There is no question about it.”
“All we are saying is to take the hand from behind their backs and put them on a level playing field. That is what we are saying here by removing the clean fuel standard.”
The complete record
Every one of 126 lines we hold for Randy Hoback, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 1 of 3.
“For somebody in downtown Toronto or downtown Montreal who takes the bus to work, maybe the benefit is not there. Maybe they need something different. If we could let people keep more of their money, or, in this situation, if we get rid of the clean fuel standard so that the cost of what they are buying is cheaper, then they will feel that benefit.”
“Mr. Speaker, I understand where the member is coming from. Actually, it depends on the demographics. If someone is in rural Saskatchewan, they are not wealthy, by any means. They are a hard-working family with a middle-class income. Reducing fuel costs for them makes a difference. They do drive. If they are going for groceries, they are driving 50 kilometres one way. That is the reality in Saskatchewan. It may be different in Quebec. I do understand that maybe there are different requirements in Quebec, as there are for a lot of other things for which Quebec has different requirements than the rest of Canada. I acknowledge that. Here is something very simple for rural people in rural Canada that would benefit them immediately. It would.”
“While we understand that the issues are there, there are different ways of approaching it. Our way makes more sense. That is why we should do it the Conservative way.”
“Mr. Speaker, I know the sincerity of the hon. member's heart. His approach to it is one way of approaching it. Is it the right way? Is it the most efficient way? That is where we would differ. The need is there. There is no question about it. However, I would like to make sure that families have good jobs, high-paying jobs, so they do not have to go to the federal government for a food program. I would like to make sure that they keep that money in their back pocket, so that they can spend it as they choose. That is the difference between the Conservative approach and the Liberal approach. Liberals would like to create a new bureaucracy, and they would like to dole out the money as they see fit. No, people should keep their money, so they can spend it as they see fit. They worked hard to earn it.”
“However, from the current government, there has been no policy, really, that has impacted people's day-to-day functions. The Liberals talk about different subsidy programs that they put in place, and they all sound good, but at the end of the day, they are not hitting the mark. They are not actually helping Canadian families. With respect to this policy and these changes, if we were to implement them tomorrow, the impact would be felt immediately. At least families would know right out to the end of the year that for the summer season and going into the fall, they would have some relief. They would know that as the economy picks up and as their job and everything else stabilize, they would be good. That is why this common-sense Conservative approach is something the Liberals should steal.”
“They did not need to be the ones doing it all by themselves. Keep in mind that we produce 2% of global emissions, yet we thought we were taking on the world and we are trying to find a way to solve 100% of global emissions. We cannot do it by ourselves, but the government is asking our businesses and our families to pay for all of this with really no benefit at the end of the day to actually make a change in the environment. Going back to these families, they are struggling. They are looking for a way to make ends meet. They want to give their kids a good quality of life. They want to see some hope and a light at the end of the tunnel. They want to see that they are through this rough patch and this structural change that is going on in the U.S. and things like that, and that there is a light at the end of the tunnel.”
“It has been 10 years of ignoring what really needs to be done through policy to make sure that Canadians can thrive, grow, experience the benefits of being a Canadian citizen and have the “top of the world” lifestyle that we became accustomed to in the years before the last 10 years of the Liberal government. These are the things that people are looking at, and they are saying, “It never used to be this way. Why is it now?” Let us look at it. We drove away industry. We brought in policies that no other country in the world has. We have done it all under the guise of being for the environment. I think a lot of people would agree that it is important to take care of our environment, and I agree with that. Canadians would agree with that, but they did not need to be the Boy Scouts of it.”
“We looked at the cost and we just cannot afford it.” They want to make sure that their kids have all of the opportunities to play different sports and experience what they all grew up with, but they say, “I do not know if we can afford it. I do not know if we can do it.” I was talking to one guy. He said, “I have three jobs because I want my kids to play hockey. I want them to experience hockey, but that means I have three jobs.” His wife is also working in that family of four. Two parents are working just so their kids can play hockey. Something is wrong with this equation. Looking back, what has happened? What is wrong? It is 10 years of bad policy.”
“When I talk to them now, they say, “We want to get our passport because it is convenient and it is easy, and thanks for offering the service, but I do not know if we will ever use it because I just cannot afford to travel. I just cannot afford to take on any luxuries like travel, but I want to have my passport.” When we drive down and ask how they are doing, what is going on in their family and how their babies are, I hear a little softening in their tone and see them biting on their lip or a tear in their eye. They say, “It is tough. We had to make the choice this year between letting our kids play baseball or play golf. We had to make the choice this year of whether we are going to put our kids in swimming lessons.”
“All we are saying is to take the hand from behind their backs and put them on a level playing field. That is what we are saying here by removing the clean fuel standard. It is not just farmers, but manufacturers and the whole Canadian economy that could find more relief and a greater ability to compete internationally by having this removed from their cost platform. I want to circle back to families and the stresses they are facing. I go to events. We held passport clinics in the riding a few weeks back, I sat down at the table and talked to people who were coming in to get passports for their kids. They may travel over the next five or six years. When I held these clinics over the last two or three years, people were talking about a trip they were going to take the next year or the year after.”
“I have been pro-free trade all my life. Coming from the agriculture sector in Saskatchewan, we trade and we sell stuff around the world. We sell to clients in China, South America, North Africa and Europe. We are doing business around the world all the time. We are competing with Brazilians, Australians and Americans. We are competing with people around the world who do not have those restraints and those embedded costs. It actually makes it tougher for us to compete. (1135) However, we are very creative in Canada. Our farmers are the best in the world. They are quick adopters of new technology. They are very astute and they are competing. They can compete, even though they have had one hand tied behind their back so many times over the last few years.”
“This tax also makes our manufacturers, suppliers and international traders uncompetitive in the global marketplace. What do I mean by that? The reality is that these are costs Canadian manufacturers and Canadian producers face, but their competitors around the world do not. These are costs that they have to embed into their pricing as they try to recover the costs and sell abroad that their competition does not have to. Automatically, they have one hand tied behind their back, yet we are telling them to diversify trade, take on new markets and find new ways of doing things. What do we do? We battle. We are basically putting more costs into the situation they are facing. It just does not make sense. We want to improve Canada's ability to market and sell around the world, which I agree with. I think those are good, honourable things to do.”
“Hopefully, those costs would trickle down to the consumer and make life just a little easier for that consumer, that Canadian citizen, to make ends meet. We proposed very simple measures. Get rid of the federal tax on gas and diesel, including the GST, and then permanently scrap the clean fuel standard. I am going to talk about the clean fuel standard right now. What is frustrating with this tax is that it is a tax. No matter how the Liberals want to bury it, it is a tax and it is a cost that will get through the supply chain to the end consumer. It always does. Those costs are always passed up the chain, and they will probably be passed up with a multiplier effect as margins are added to them all the way through. They end up in the consumer's back pocket, and those costs are hurting it.”
“That is where we, as a government, can play a role. That is one of the proposals we have made today. It is a simple solution that could immediately be implemented, and its impact could be felt immediately, without a huge bureaucracy being created and without a whole pile of spending on administrating and trying to create new programs. It is a very simple choice, which is to remove the fuel tax on diesel and gas. Instantaneously, that would provide relief at the pumps. It would not only provide relief for the family, but provide relief for the guys who are hauling the food to the warehouse or from the warehouse to the grocery store. It would provide a domino effect of relief through all sectors here in Canada that would make life just that much easier.”
“I never got the tractor stuck. That was always my dad. I will say that, or at least that is what I will admit to. Talking about stress leads to what we are talking about today. Canadians are stressed. They are financially stressed. They are feeling the impact of costs going up. They are feeling the impact of their wages just not keeping up with what they have to pay per week or per month for the standard cost of living. We are not talking about surplus things or things that are just a benefit. I am talking about the day-to-day requirements to actually feed a family or put clothes on kids and get them off to school. Those are the types of costs that Canadians are struggling with. In a lot of cases, people are maxing out their credit cards. They are looking at ways to save money, but there is just nothing left to cut.”
“To farmer friends in my riding, across Saskatchewan and across Canada, slow down, take a breath, relax and be safe out there. To those who are working in agricultural districts or driving down those roads, remember that those farmers are working really hard and they are have time constraints. Give them space on the road. If people see a tractor coming down the road, they should slow down and let them go by. If they see a sprayer, slow down and let them go by. Let them do their business, because it is so crucial right now, in this next week or two, that they get the crop in as quickly as they can. Trust me when I say these are stressful conditions. Farmers are wet and they are frustrated. I have been there and done that. I have been up to my knees and up to my waist, and I know what it is like to pull a tractor out.”
“Mr. Speaker, I will be splitting my time with the hon. member for Essex , who has been a breath of fresh air since he came to this House. He has done a great job. He represents the people of his riding. I have been to his riding and met first-hand all the wonderful people in that area. I want them to know they have a great member. I look forward to working with him for years to come. In Saskatchewan right now, it is spring seeding time. It is a tough time right now, because seeding is about three weeks later than it should be. People are stressed. They are burning the midnight oil, or burning the candle at both ends, one might say, to get the crop in because of the timely nature of the crops they are planting. I want to mention this in the little time I have.”
“Mr. Speaker, I am kind of curious, with the member's location and where she lives, in regard to the privatization of airports, in particular Billy Bishop airport and the expansion of the runway. What is the Liberal Party's opinion on the expansion of the runway at Billy Bishop airport and its possible privatization?”
“Mr. Speaker, I have worked with my colleague on the trade committee in the past, and I know she is someone who understands trade and how important it is for Canadian products to get to the world market. The concern I have in her speech is that she talked about the importance of trade, but she did not mention the fact that if we cannot get the product to market, how do we actually achieve those results? One of the problems we have in Canada is that our ports are ranked next to dead last and our rail system is unreliable. Our infrastructure is just not there. Where does the member see growth happening with this budget if it does not address the issues with our ports?”
“To those back home, their bravery, strength and co-operation has helped save people's homes and properties. I thank all those who have stepped up to help their neighbours through these difficult times.”
“Mr. Speaker, today I want to recognize the communities across Saskatchewan and in my riding of Prince Albert that are facing serious flooding. This week, the Saskatchewan Public Safety Agency reported that 34 communities are under local states of emergency, with 20 active flooding incidents. Families are dealing with flooded roads, damaged property and the uncertainty that comes with rapidly changing conditions. With significant road closures and communities under pressure, first responders, volunteers and neighbours are working around the clock to keep people safe, but they should not have to face this alone. I urge all levels of government to act without delay by working together to deliver emergency response, evacuation support and disaster assistance to those affected communities.”
“Mr. Speaker, Canadians are being left in the dark on the CUSMA review. We are forced to rely on media reports and the occasional committee appearance, hearing only vague talk of challenges faced. My constituents are calling me, concerned for their families and their businesses as a resolution to these disputes continues to grind on. In fact, many of us know more about the status of the U.S.-Mexico negotiations than those of our own country. When will the Prime Minister provide a clear update to this House on the deal that he promised to secure over a year ago?”
“Mr. Speaker, on April 2, the United States announced substantial changes to how they will collect steel and aluminum tariffs. Now applied to the full value of products, this change will result in higher costs for Canadian manufacturers and reduce business activity across this country. Workers and businesses are looking for leadership, but instead they are getting silence. Was the Prime Minister aware of these changes? What is he doing to have these tariffs removed?”
“Mr. Speaker, with record closures across the country, Canada's small businesses are sounding the alarm. High costs, red tape and never-ending uncertainty are discouraging the next generation of entrepreneurs. Do not take it from me. Brianna Solberg of the CFIB warns that “Canada’s economic foundation is crumbling.” After 10 years of bad Liberal policy, half of small business owners say they would not recommend starting a business. Why do the Liberals continue to make it harder and not easier for small businesses here in Canada?”
“Mr. Speaker, the member laid out an example that I am not familiar with. I do not know the details and cannot answer the question effectively. The member and I are going to dispute investor state dispute settlements, because she looks at it through a different window than I do. I look at it as the mechanism for making sure that things are done fairly, equally and properly, and that everybody is protected, no matter what happens.”
“Mr. Speaker, there is a lot in that question. The member talked about the Alto train and the $90 billion, which will probably be $150 billion and which will probably be $200 billion by the time it is actually built and completed, where the average ticket cost will probably be around $2,000 one way in a corridor that actually is already being served by bus, existing rail and airplane. If the government has that kind of money, just think what it could do for port infrastructure and highway infrastructure that could actually bring revenue and royalties back to our country and provide the social programs that we want to see going forward. It is not that we do not want to dream. Dreams are fine, but reality does have to set in once in a while, and practicality has to rule the day.”
“Where have you been for the last 10 years when we were talking about the port of Churchill? SARM has been on it, and a lot of other groups have been talking about it. Where has the Liberal government been? It has been nowhere to be found.”
“Mr. Speaker, I applaud the Prime Minister if that is actually what he ends up doing at the end of the day, once he proves to me that he has shovels in the ground and is doing it. However, where have you been for the last 10 years? How did we get into such a bad deficit situation in the last 10 years? Where have you been? The same Liberal members are sitting over there with a different guy leading them. That is all it is. You are telling me one person can now make all this happen? Where have you been for the last 12 years? Churchill is a perfect example. Wab Kinew, and I give him credit, is promoting that. I think that is a great idea. I am standing behind it. It seems to me that makes a lot of sense for bringing grains out of western Canada into the European marketplace. I would think it is great for LNG, and maybe even oil and gas.”
“Mr. Speaker, we need the Ring of Fire. The reality is that for the types of goods and products we are producing into the future, the elements sitting in the Ring of Fire have to come to market. Either we bring them to market or the Chinese are going to bring them to market. If we want economic independence and the ability to take care of ourselves and our allies, the Ring of Fire becomes very crucial to seeing that develop. I will compliment Premier Ford for moving forward with that road. I am very concerned that the federal government is dragging its heels. It needs to shape up, get out of the way and make sure things happen. I am sorry, but it should not take five years to approve a mine that has been talked about for the last 15 years.”
“That is the idea behind ISDR, investor-state dispute resolution. It can be a small or medium-sized enterprise that is engaged in that type of situation. It does not have to be a big corporation, which everybody from the left seems to want to say is what is going on. The left has raised more money on investor-state dispute resolution than what the actual facts show. There are times we need those types of agreements in our trade agreements in order to make sure the investments we do abroad are protected. That is why they are there.”
“Mr. Speaker, that is a great question. I am in favour of ISDR when it makes sense to have an investor-state dispute mechanism. When we looked at removing chapter 11, the history of it and the number of disputes, the amount paid out versus the amount of trade we actually did was very small. The percentage was so small it was unreal. When we looked at what was being paid out, the reality is that it was because of the nationalization of a pulp mill. If a pulp mill is nationalized by a provincial government, does one not think that company deserves some sort of settlement? Let me reverse it. If a Canadian company is investing in another country and all of a sudden that country changes its constitution, changes its laws and comes back saying it is nationalizing that facility and the company has no recourse, is that fair?”
“Mr. Speaker, if I remember that bill, it was an ominous bill that had all sorts of things in it, including that. When we put a piece of pie in with a bunch of garbage, it is still a bunch of garbage. We do not get the chance to separate the piece of pie. There are things the member said that I would agree with, vote for and say they are good investments in Canada. However, the way the Liberals went about doing it made it impossible to support. Yes, they had their political wedge, and I congratulate them on it, good job, but did they do Canada any favours? No, they did not.”
“If the Liberal government really wants to do something, if it really wants to leave an impact that is going to help our kids, it must get serious about the infrastructure. If it is going to invest in things, it needs to get serious about those types of things and invest in those. If it is not going to get serious on that, if it is not going to get serious about improving our efficiency and our costs of production and getting those down, if it is not going to get serious about doing those types of things, then we are going to have another year until the next election, or whenever that may be, of lost opportunity. Do not let it be an 11-year lost opportunity. Make some changes. I implore the government to do that. If it will not, we will.”
“I ask him show us the actions. He should show Canadians the actions he is going to take to position us properly, and not just for this negotiation because that is irrelevant as it is going to be what it is. It is what it is. Who is going to position Canada going into the future? Who has the vision of Canada to take advantage of the resources we are given, and to do it in a manner that we can all appreciate and respect and that is honourable? Canada has so much going for it. We have a good rule of law and a great global reputation. We have a great education system. There is no reason we cannot be the best, most popular superpower in the world when it comes to delivering, whether it is resources, finished goods or AI products. Name it and we can do it. I am going to end with a challenge.”
“We would say to the Americans, when we had disputes over the last four years, that we have critical minerals and that they did not want to piss us off because we have critical minerals. The first year, that worked. The second year, they said, okay, that it is good. They needed critical minerals and did not want to buy their critical minerals from China. The third year, they looked at us and said to prove to them we can get them out of the ground and that we can actually do something. This is the question I would have for the Prime Minister . It is to prove to Canadians that he is actually going to accomplish something. He has made some great speeches and people are raving about some of the speeches he has given around the world, which is fair enough. Words are good and important, but actions really show who someone is.”
“I remember working very closely with the embassies down there, making sure we had the proper data and information so that when we sat down with a member, not only did they know when we left what the relationship was, but they knew how many jobs were created because of trade with Canada. They knew exactly how much economic activity was happening in their district because of Canada. They had a good sense and understanding of exactly what that agreement meant. We can do all that again. I know the embassy down in the U.S. has good people. It really does, and they are doing the best they can. However, the reality is that we are weak, and they know we are weak. The reality is that they know we do not have a lot of leverage, unless we start to develop the things we have. In fact, we used to use the leverage of critical minerals.”
“The best thing we can do is control the things we can control. We do not know what the President of the U.S. is going to do, and he has every right to do whatever he wants to do. It is his country. The Americans will have those debates among themselves. Congress will decide how much leeway it will give the President when it comes to trade, trade issues and trade files. Again, that is out of our hands. We cannot control that. We can do our best to influence it. We can do our best to make sure the Americans understand the consequences of it. I was part of a team that did that in 2018. I still remember going there with Brian Masse from the NDP and Wayne Easter and Andrew Leslie from the Liberal Party and talking about the importance of trade and what it meant to them and their districts.”
“It was 10 years of bad policy, at both the federal and provincial levels, a lack of infrastructure and infrastructure investment, and a lack of desire to actually allow it to happen. They have people who are basically the “no development” crowd, who say we should not develop anything but should just leave it all in the ground. I am sorry. In this day and age that does not work. That will not feed our kids. That does not provide the wealth that Canadians have come to expect. (1640) Let us go into some of the other aspects that are happening around the globe today. We are talking about the USMCA, or CUSMA, whatever we want to call it. It is a file that I know fairly intimately and that is very close to my heart. If we want leverage in that file, the best thing we can do is develop our country.”
“It would have been used to balance our budgets. That is how they get the money to provide the social programs that they want to deliver to Canadians. Norway is a perfect example of that. They have taken their sovereign wealth fund and used it to provide not only social services across Norway but wealth for the next generation and the generation after that. Norwegians know their kids and grandkids are going to be taken care of. We know our kids and grandkids here in Canada cannot buy a house and probably may never be able to buy a house unless something drastically changes. When we look at that and we see all these opportunities and all the potential and all the things that could be happening here in Canada, it makes us wonder why. What has gotten in the way? It was 10 years of Trudeau, for sure.”
“I am sure a lot of businessmen from Asia and around the world, when they come into Canada and they look at the maps, say, “Wow, this is awesome.” Then, they go in and they try to develop it and realize that it is 14 years for a mine, so they say, “Next.” Then they say, “Okay, I can get a mine, but I do not have a train or a truck or a road. Next.” That is what has been reoccurring over the last 10 years here in Canada. It is not that we do not have the resources. It is not that we do not have the educated workforce. It is not that we do not have the opportunity. We do not have the systems to allow people to say yes. We get in our way. That has been showing up over and over again, and we have left so much wealth on the table. That wealth could have been used for our hospitals, our pharmacare program and our dental care program.”
“They can go around the world and sign all the trade agreements they want, but if they cannot get the goods to market, what good is it? The goods that we have in Canada are what the world wants. Think about it. Just in my province of Saskatchewan there are uranium, forestry products, grains and oilseeds, lentils and pulses, oil and gas, potash and fertilizer. That is just in Saskatchewan. Let us go down into Manitoba. Manitoba has grains and oilseeds and hydro. What does Alberta have? It has all sorts of things. We can go province by province and we have everything that the world wants.”
“Other countries in the world have done great jobs on their ports and the port systems in their infrastructure. We do not need to reinvent the wheel. I have never been one for reinventing the wheel unless there is something new that has not been invented before. There are companies and groups in the world, in Singapore for example, who run tremendous port facilities. Why do we not just go talk to them and ask them how we should do it in Vancouver? Why would we not take advantage of that knowledge and that wisdom and make sure that we have that here in Canada? We want to grow this economy and diversify trade, but if we do not spend the money on the infrastructure and on making sure that we can deliver the products, it does not matter.”
“People really do not know what is coming into Halifax until it hits Halifax, and the reason they do not know is that the computer systems have not been invested in so that they have the ability to see what is coming in. When they get the paper manifest, that is when they find out what is in that container. Keep in mind that Halifax takes those containers and has a huge opportunity to take those big ships, unload those containers, put them onto smaller ships and go into New York, Boston and all those other harbours. Port of Halifax personnel have that potential if we give them the proper hardware and software to do that, and if the railways and the ports can talk to each other in a manner that is consistent. We do not have that in Canada. We need to put those types of systems in place. It can be done.”
“They know they are going to get the grain. They know they are going to get the lumber. They know they are going to get the oil. They know they are going to get it, so why do they care when? That is what has happened and it is why, when a customer in Japan is saying, “Listen guys, I love your wheat. I want more of it, but I cannot take more because I do not know when I am going to get it. You may give me a thousand tonnes one week and nothing for the next six weeks,” that has to do with our ports and rails. When are they going to fix those systems? When are they going to invest in that type of infrastructure? When are they going to make it so that when I have a container of manufactured goods, I know exactly where it is throughout the chain? We do not have those capacities here, and that was a big frustration in the port of Halifax.”
“to come back up to Sarnia to provide propane for Quebec and puts Sarnia and the industries relying on natural gas in jeopardy and held up by the U.S.? Where is that infrastructure investment? Where is that commitment to make us self-reliant? It has not showed up or been talked about. We need to make these ports the best in the world, we need to make our infrastructure some of the best in the world, and we need to look at our rail system and revamp our rail service. Our rail service is so bad in Canada, and it has been bad for years. When I was farming, our biggest complaint on the farm was the rail service and lack of it. (1635) We had CEOs who were more concerned about the shareholders than their customers, and those same CEOs are still more concerned about their shareholders than their customers.”
“If we went to the port of Montreal or Prince Rupert, I think we would see the same issues. These ports need to become the best ports in the world. They need investment and to be able to deliver products when they say they are going to. We need to spend money there and understand that if we truly want to take advantage of all the goods that God has given us and export them around the world, we have to have the infrastructure to do that. We have not reinvested in our highways. Why do so many heavy semis going from east to west go into the U.S.? For example, a semi coming out of Quebec would go into the U.S. to come to Saskatchewan rather than using the Trans-Canada Highway. Why is that? Why do we rely on a pipeline, line 5, that goes to the U.S.”
“That is the scenario we face in Canada today. Three of our four top ports are in the bottom 15% of the globe. They are the worst in the world. Halifax, to its credit, is in the top 50. I will give Halifax credit. I toured Halifax in 2024. It has done a great job in expanding, utilizing and managing the port. However, in Prince Rupert, Vancouver and Montreal, there is a lot of work that needs to be done and a lot of infrastructure that needs to be put in place. When we talk to customers and ask what their biggest threat or concern is, let us say, in Vancouver, they say it is congestion. What is being invested today to help with congestion? What is being invested today in the Port of Vancouver to take the wait time of a vessel from 10 days down to two days?”
“Harper and Ed Fast understood that when we do a trade agreement, we also need to build the infrastructure to deliver the goods to market in a timely manner that is consistent with what the consumer and the supplier agreed upon and in a time frame that is bankable. We do not have that right now. In fact, if members talked to customers in Japan or other parts of Asia, they would say they love Canadian product. I will use the grain sector. They would say they love Canadian wheat but will never give us 100% of their business because they cannot rely on us to deliver it on time in a manner that is consistent and bankable. We have a reputation problem in our ports, in our rail system and in our infrastructure. It does not matter how many trade deals or MOUs we sign; if we cannot get the product to market in a bankable manner, they are useless.”
“Look at what Germany did. In a matter of less than 60 days, it approved and permitted an LNG facility. In a matter of six months, it was operating. We should think about that, the urgency with which Germany could move and react to an ongoing crisis. The Prime Minister has been saying that we have a crisis in Canada and that we have to be bold and move forward. If that is the case, then why are we not doing the same thing? It is okay to go around the world, talk about rebuilding and sign MOUs on trade agreements that were developed by Ed Fast and Prime Minister Harper back in the 2008-15 era. It is nice to see the Prime Minister encouraging companies and people to take advantage of those 51 trade agreements, going out and trying to sell Canada again, but if people cannot get their goods to market, what good are they?”
“Mr. Speaker, I thought I could sneak that in there. If there was a Conservative prime minister, I know he would be going around the world opening up those markets and rebuilding those relationships. That would be a top priority. In fact, we will see the Conservative leader go to the U.S. next week and do exactly that. He will talk about how Canada is such a great place to invest in and a great place to do business, and he is going to be very successful, just as he was last week in the U.K. and Germany. One thing he learned when he was in Germany, and here I am going to lead into the next part of my presentation, is the LNG aspect. When Germany came knocking on Canada's door, Trudeau said there was no market or economic potential for LNG going outside of Canada and into the rest of the world. Germany proved him 100% wrong.”