Kent MacDonald

Mr. Speaker, Canadians understand that food security is national security. In fact, a Nanos Research survey released this month for Dairy Farmers of Canada found that 94% of Canadians believe it is important that Canada maintain as much control as possible over its food supply. The survey also found significant support for Canadian farmers and the supply management system, which helps ensure a stable and reliable food supply. As a farmer myself, I know the importance of growing, producing and processing more of our food here at home. Last week our Prime Minister unveiled Canada's national food strategy. Could the Minister of Agriculture—

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to speak to Bill C-240, the offender rehabilitation act. I want to begin by recognizing the underlying objectives of this bill: to strengthen rehabilitation, reinforce accountability and ultimately improve public safety in Canada. These are goals I believe we all share. Ensuring that our justice system not only responds to crime, but also reduces the likelihood of reoffending is essential to safer communities. This bill would amend three key statutes: the Criminal Code, the Corrections and Conditional Release Act, and the Controlled Drugs and Substances Act, with a view to more explicitly integrating rehabilitation into sentencing, tying progress and rehabilitation to parole decisions, and addressing serious drug trafficking, including fentanyl. First, Bill C-240 would give courts the authority to require specific rehabilitative measures as part of an offender's sentence. In addition to imposing the term of imprisonment, Bill C-240 would give courts the ability to require an offender to participate in educational programs, job training or, where appropriate, with the offender's consent, treatment programs. The intent here is clear: to ensure that sentencing not only reflects accountability, but also establishes a pathway to address the underlying factors that contributed to the offence. It appears that this change is intended to ensure that when individuals are taken into custody, the criminal justice and correctional system would work together to create a clear path for how the underlying factors that contributed to their offence would be addressed, including substance use, lack of skills or other challenges. There is merit in considering this approach. Recognizing and addressing the challenges that contribute to criminality is an important part of breaking cycles of offending. It should also be noted that, at least at the federal level, there are already tools and processes in place to support offender rehabilitation and treatment, including the use of empirically based assessment tools to identify programming needs. At the same time, the impacts of these provisions, including how such orders would be implemented and the consequences of not complying, are important questions that would benefit from careful study at committee. Second, the bill intends to ensure that these court-ordered measures would be incorporated into an offender's correctional plan. By extension, an offender is held accountable for their progress on these measures and it would become a consideration in conditional release decisions. In other words, if an offender makes reasonable efforts to complete the ordered training, education or treatment, that progress would form part of their assessment, including for key decisions such as for parole. If they do not, that too would be taken into consideration. It will be important to examine how these proposed amendments would function in practice. Key considerations include the availability of programs, including in the jurisdiction or community where the sentence is to be served; how assessed needs align with access to appropriate services; and the criteria that apply in release decisions. Research shows that offering programs to low-risk offenders can in fact increase their risk. As such, if the courts are too prescriptive in their requirements, there are risks. The correctional system has the empirical tools and the expertise to determine the program and the treatment needs tailored to each individual offender. It will also be important to ensure that, should the bill pass, any conditions that form part of a sentence are realistic and capable of being complied with. Offenders should not be unfairly prejudiced by barriers outside of their control, including differences in service availability, depending on where a sentence is served. Ensuring fairness, consistency and transparency in these processes will be key. Third, the bill aims to address a significant public safety challenge facing our country, the opioid crisis, and, in particular, the role of fentanyl. Bill C-240 would amend the Controlled Drugs and Substances Act to require that courts treat large-scale fentanyl trafficking as an aggravating factor in sentencing. This means that when individuals are convicted of trafficking in quantities that indicate large-scale operations, judges would be encouraged to impose more severe sentences. The intent here is clear and it is very important. The harm caused by fentanyl in communities across Canada is profound, and measures that seek to hold accountable those who profit from that harm deserve serious consideration. At the same time, we must consider how these provisions would operate in practice, including how large-scale activity would be interpreted and whether this approach would serve to address current trends in organized crime or reflect the constant evolution of dangerous substances. It is also important to consider the broader societal context in which the bill would operate. Individuals who enter the correctional system often face multiple barriers long before their offence occurs, including limited access to education, unstable employment, mental health challenges and substance use disorders. Addressing those factors is essential if we are to reduce reoffending and improve long-term public safety. Bill C-240 recognizes this reality by proposing to make rehabilitation a more explicit and structured part of sentencing. It also aims to create another layer of accountability for an offender to meaningfully engage in that process. That said, it would be important to assess how these measures could be implemented effectively, including how they would align with the empirically derived risks-and-needs principles applied in the correctional system, as well as program availability across jurisdictions and consistency of delivery. We should also recognize the economic dimension of this issue. When people reoffend, the costs are borne not only by the victims but also by the justice system itself, through policing, the courts and correctional services. Investments in effective rehabilitation could reduce those pressures over time by lowering rates of re-entry into the system. Ensuring that the proposed approach would achieve those outcomes in a measurable and sustainable way would be an important part of the study of Bill C-240 at committee. The objective of the bill also appears to aim to provide greater clarity and transparency by allowing courts to set expectations, and requiring those expectations to be tracked through an offender's sentence. This is a positive principle. The broader approach outlined in Bill C-240, focusing on rehabilitation and reintegration, reflects principles that many practitioners support. The question for committee would be how best to translate those principles into workable and effective processes within the existing system. Ultimately, our communities want a justice system that enhances public safety, reduces reoffending and supports successful reintegration. Bill C-240 speaks to those broad objectives. The task before us is to ensure that the mechanisms it proposes are sound, effective and achievable. By embedding rehabilitation into sentencing, strengthening follow-through during incarceration and linking progress to parole decisions, the bill sets out a direction that many people would agree is worth exploring. Likewise, its focus on responding to the harms associated with fentanyl reflects a serious and pressing concern. As the bill moves forward, committee study would be critical and would provide an opportunity to examine its provisions in greater detail. That process would help to determine what refinements or amendments may be necessary to ensure that the legislation would achieve its intended goals and avoid unintended consequences. For these reasons, I support sending Bill C-240 to committee for further study so we could work collectively to strengthen the PMB and ensure that it would deliver meaningful results for communities across this country.

Mr. Speaker, as we celebrate World Milk Day today, on June 1, I rise to recognize the hard-working dairy farmers who have helped feed our country and strengthen our communities. Having spent most of my life as a dairy farmer in Little Pond, Prince Edward Island, this day holds special meaning to me. Canada's dairy sector includes more than 9,000 farms and supports over 270,000 jobs in communities across our country. Our supply-managed dairy sector helps provide something no other country can give us: the ability to feed ourselves. At a time of increased global uncertainty, our food sovereignty has never been more important, so today, I invite all Canadians to raise a glass to our dairy farmers and thank them for the important role they play in our communities and our economy. I am proud to be a Canadian dairy farmer, the son of a dairy farmer and the father of another.

Mr. Speaker, that is a hard act to follow, but as we are dealing with climate change, and it continues to increase the frequency and severity of emergencies like flooding, wildfires and storms, it is critical that indigenous communities are recognized as equal partners in emergency preparedness and response efforts that keep community members safe. Can the Minister of Indigenous Services update this House on the historic agreement signed with the Abegweit First Nation and the Government of P.E.I., and on how our government is advancing indigenous-led approaches to emergency management and community resilience in P.E.I. and across the country?

Mr. Chair, I rise this evening to highlight the contributions of the new government in Bill C-30 to the coastal communities of Prince Edward Island. Small craft harbours are places of employment for more than 1,200 fishers. For many, it is a way of life passed from one generation to the next, from setting day when family and friends line the wharf to wish harvesters a safe and prosperous season to the last trap that comes ashore at the end of the season. It is the pride of families who have made their living from the sea for decades. For Islanders, fishing is part of our identity. It is parents and the next generation hauling traps together, learning the ropes. It is gathering at the wharf after a long day on the water to talk about the daily fishing news. It is communities built around hard work, resilience and respect for the ocean. Across Atlantic Canada, this same story exists across coastal communities where the fishery sustains not only local economies but traditions, culture and livelihoods. In Prince Edward Island alone, the total value of fish and aquaculture exceeded $454 million in 2024, with lobster landings accounting for more than $358 million of this. The overall contribution to P.E.I.'s economy exceeds almost $1 billion and supports as many as 8,000 jobs at peak production. Across Atlantic Canada, fisheries landings totalled more than $3.6 billion in 2024, with shellfish accounting for over $3.28 billion of that value. These are not just statistics. These are processing plants operating in rural communities. They are truck drivers, welders, suppliers, fuel operators, mechanics, buyers and plant workers, whose livelihoods depend on a strong and sustainable fishery. Small craft harbours are the centre of all this activity. They are the economic engines of many rural communities in Atlantic Canada, yet for many years, too many of these harbours have faced underinvestment, aging infrastructure, storm damage and the growing impacts of climate change, as we have seen with the devastating impacts of hurricane Fiona. In many areas, fishers and harbour authorities are doing everything they can simply to keep facilities operational while waiting for major repairs and modernization work to proceed. Here in Ottawa, we formed a small craft harbours committee to discuss these very issues as a collective. I want to take this opportunity to thank my colleagues for their unwavering persistence to work with me for funding for small craft harbours. I also want to personally thank the Prime Minister and the ministers of finance and fisheries for making sure our proposal for a significant investment in small craft harbours was included in the spring economic statement. We are very pleased to see the beginning of the rollout of these announcements across Atlantic Canada, the Pacific coast and the north as part of the nearly $1-billion investment over five years through the small craft harbours program. This is the largest sustained investment in small craft harbours in decades. However, maintaining safe and functional harbours is not only about wharfs and breakwaters. It also requires ongoing and responsive dredging investments to ensure channels remain navigable and safe for harvesters. In Prince Edward Island and across Atlantic Canada, weather events, storm surges and coastal erosion can quickly impact harbour entrances and navigation channels. When dredging delays occur, fish harvesters face serious operational and safety challenges, particularly during low tide. Responsive dredging capacity following major weather events must be viewed as essential maintenance for our harbours. During her recent visit to Red Head Harbour, the Minister of Fisheries saw first-hand sections of the harbour that have been fenced off because of damage and safety concerns. That reality should be a concern to all of us. Harbours are workplaces. They should be safe for fish harvesters. They should be safe for buyers, plant workers, transport operators and the many families and tourists who visit throughout the season. Red Head is not alone. Harbours in the Cardigan riding, which I represent, like Mink River, Fortune and Georgetown, all continue to wait in the queue for repairs to ensure their harbour infrastructure can support their fisheries. I also want to take an opportunity to commend the Prince Edward Island Fishermen's Association and associations across Atlantic Canada for the leadership they continue to show in advancing conservation measures while sustaining fisheries. Harvesters understand the need to protect marine ecosystems because their livelihoods and their futures depend on them. When we invest in fisheries, we are investing in much more than infrastructure or economic output. We are investing in communities where families will continue to watch boats come home at sunset and where generations continue to see that there is a viable future on the water. That future matters deeply to Prince Edward Island and to Atlantic Canada. I believe there is much more to come as we continue building stronger coastal communities, modernizing harbours, supporting innovation in conservation and ensuring that the next generation can continue with a proud tradition of making a living from the sea. I believe we also need to think bigger about the role of ports and harbour infrastructure in Atlantic Canada and throughout Canada. Our harbours are not only critical to the fishing industry. They also represent untapped economic potential tied to trade diversification, domestic supply chains, food security and transportation corridors. In Prince Edward Island and across Atlantic Canada, strategic investments in harbour and port infrastructure could support seafood exports, agri-food storage and transportation, cold storage capacity and greater access to domestic and international markets. These investments can strengthen economic resilience while reducing pressure on larger transportation hubs. There is also growing potential for ports and marine infrastructure to support broader national objectives, including Arctic and defence supply chains, emergency response capacity and economic security. Coastal communities have always played an essential role in building Canada's economy, and they will continue to play an even greater role as we strengthen domestic trade and transportation networks. Can the minister speak to how the government views small craft harbours as strategic economic assets that strengthen trade diversification, food security and rural economic resilience across Atlantic Canada?