Archive for June, 2005

I’ve been getting questions on the BSE situation and the court case in Billings, Montana. Here is a brief update on the situation.

Montana Judge Richard Cebull has granted 64 Conservative MPs and six senators the right to be part of a vital court hearing regarding whether or not the border should be re-opened to imports of live cattle from Canada.

“Amicus” standing in the case of R-CALF vs. USDA allows us to collectively submit a single, 10 page legal brief to the Montana court.

The Conservative Party of Canada’s amicus brief will be produced by our solicitor, Barry Appleton, after consultations have been made with stakeholders from the livestock industry.

Unfortunately, Ottawa cannot defend the interests of Canadian farmers and ranchers in U.S. court because the government did not appeal Judge Cebull’s dismissal of its own application for amicus standing.

Why did the Liberals leave it to Opposition MPs to defend the rights of Canadian farmers and ranchers?

This is the first time that Canadian MPs and senators have been given the ability to defend our country’s national policies before a foreign court. I am proud to take part in such a crucial court case for the livestock industry in Saskatchewan. We need a lawyer in that Montana courtroom so we can contest R-CALF’s accusations about Canada’s ability to test for BSE and the safety of Canadian beef.

I’m Brad Trost, your Member of Parliament, and I welcome your feedback. Write or call my offices.

Most weeks, I concentrate on one topic per column. This week, I thought I’d go over three different issues:

Genealogy Bill S-18: The House of Commons is about to pass a Bill making life easier for genealogists. Census data that is 92 years old or older will now be fully released. This is particularly important in Saskatchewan, because of a special census that was conducted on the prairies after heavy European immigration at the beginning of the 20th century. So, if you have questions about your family tree, you may be able to get some more answers in just a few short months.

Fertilizer and National Security-You might wonder why the RCMP would be concerned about fertilizer–until you remember that some fertilizers can be used to make a bomb. The RCMP, along with industry representatives and other government officials, are working on updating national regulations to make sure fertilizer is only used for intended purposes.

Jewelry Tax Break-A left over tax from World War I was repealed by the House of Commons. A Conservative Bill that repealed a tax on jewelry was passed with support of all opposition parties. Removal of the tax will help boost Canada’s diamond and jewelry industries. The bill will make it cheaper to “pop the question”, so if you’re a young couple–good news for you. (The bill still needs Senate approval.)

Anyways, that’s what’s up in Ottawa these days.

I’m Brad Trost, your Member of Parliament. I welcome your feedback. (Suggestions are always welcome.) Write or call my offices.

You may not have heard anything about it on the news, but on June 7th, the House of Commons voted on an important health care motion. The motion (sponsored by Conservative MP Steven Fletcher) called for Canada to have a national strategy for fighting cancer. As one of the MPs who spoke on this issue, I would like to share with you what the Conservative Party was trying to accomplish.

The Council of the Canadian Strategy for Cancer Control, a group of 700 cancer experts and cancer survivors, brought together a well thought out plan to organize resources to fight cancer. Similar plans have been implemented in Austria, Finland and other European countries with great success. Fewer people developed cancer. Treatments improved and the number of deaths due to cancer dropped. Ireland saw a 10% reduction in cancer deaths, for example.

Having seen this data and the plan put together by the Council of the Canadian Strategy for Cancer Control, it was obvious that a national strategy to coordinate the fight against cancer only made sense (especially since other countries have proved the concept works).

We have all contributed to cancer walks, marathons and Terry Fox appeals. Therefore, a strategy which focuses resources and concentrates on outcomes should make each dollar donated to fight cancer go a little bit farther.

The plan made sense to other Members of Parliament as well. The House of Commons voted to support the motion, even though it was sponsored by the Conservatives and not the government. Unfortunately, the Strategy for Cancer Control may not be implemented because the federal health minister is opposed to the plan. Perhaps a new government will implement this national strategy in the future.

I’m Brad Trost, your Member of Parliament, and I welcome your feedback. Write or call my offices.

You may have received a mailing from my office warning about the costs of the Kyoto Accord. Most of the major media in Canada, like the CBC and the Toronto newspapers love Kyoto.

Like Chicken Little, they say the sky will fall if Kyoto is not fully implemented. Let me give you a few reasons why I am opposed to the implementation of the Kyoto Accord, or the Kyoto Protocol as it is also known.

First, I am a geophysicist. While I am not a professional climatologist, I am trained in both physics and the geosciences. As a geophysicist, I am very interested in the science of climate change, and not merely the rhetoric.

Despite the media’s repeated warnings about impending and disastrous human-caused climate change, the latest research shows that the problem almost certainly doesn’t exist. Virtually all the last century’s global warming was modest, completely natural and caused primarily by changes in the sun’s output.

Secondly, if Kyoto is fully implemented it will be very expensive for Saskatchewan. Professor Mark Jaccard of Simon Fraser University is an energy expert and one of the first researchers who ran the numbers regarding the effect that implementation of the Kyoto Protocol will have on energy prices in Canada.

In recent testimony before the House of Commons Environment Committee, Professor Jaccard stressed that the cost of gasoline, diesel, electricity and natural gas will double if the Kyoto Accord is implemented. The Canadian Taxpayers Federation has calculated that every household in this country will lose about $3,000 per year in net income under Kyoto.

That’s right: Kyoto will cost every family about $3,000 in after tax income annually due to higher energy and labour costs. This income loss will be especially hard on seniors and low-income families.

Finally, Kyoto is bad environmental policy. Kyoto diverted $10 billion away from real environmental problems. Kyoto does not target smog, it doesn’t clean up polluted water, and it doesn’t deal with toxic waste.

Standing up against Kyoto may not be popular with the Toronto elite, but it’s the right thing to do. My job is to stand up for Saskatchewan and support good policies. I expect to be criticized for my stand, but I represent Saskatchewan and will always speak out for my constituency.

I’m Brad Trost, your Member of Parliament, and I welcome your feedback. Write or call my offices.