Beauséjour

The following questionnaire was submitted to all candidates running in New Brunswick’s 10 federal ridings. Candidates had two weeks to complete the questionnaire and submit their responses. Candidates were asked to limit their response to 200 words.

Climate

  1. Scientists say we need to reduce greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions by at least 80 cent of 1990 levels by 2050 to avoid catastrophic climate change. What is your party’s 2050 GHG reduction target and how will you achieve it?

Conservative — Anne Bastarache: No response.

Liberal — Dominic LeBlanc: Le Parti libéral va instaurer une cible ambitieuse et responsable en coopération avec les provinces. Justin Trudeau va inclure les Premier ministres des provinces au sein de la Conférence de Paris et mettra en place une cible ferme que les provinces devront respecter, tout en adoptant la méthode qui représente le mieux leur réalité locale.

NDP — Helene Boudreau: New Democrats believe climate change is a clear and present danger to all Canadians. We have a multi-pronged approach to helping fight climate change and reducing greenhouse gas emissions. We will re-introduce Jack Layton’s Climate Change Accountability Act to ensure that Canada meets its long-term target of reducing our greenhouse gas emissions to a level 80% below that of 1990 by the year 2050, and 34% below 1990 for the 2025/30 period.

Green — Kevin King: The amount of energy used today is astronomical considering most of it is lost; reducing this amount is our first goal. Eliminating the subsidies from oil and gas and giving them to green sector job creating initiatives will phase one and introduce another, furthermore the Green Party of Canada’s plan to create an army of carpenters and tradespeople will create thousands of job opportunities across all jurisdictions all while providing homeowners with opportunities to save on their energy bills. By initially plugging the hole so to speak, we reduce the amount needed to power the older generation homes while giving rise to the net-zero or near-net-zero homes of the future. Renewable energy grants to communities will allow them to be more energy independent and will eliminate the need for billion dollar power plants that fuel climate change.

 

  1. Many leading economists and policy institutions say putting a price on carbon is an effective way to reduce the pollution causing climate change. Will your party put a price on carbon?

Conservative — Anne Bastarache: No response.

Liberal — Dominic LeBlanc: Le plan du Parti libéral mettra un prix sur le carbone. La méthode choisie pour le faire différera d’une province à l’autre, car les différentes régions du pays font face à différentes réalités que nous nous devons de reconnaître. De cette façon, l’Ontario et le Québec pourront garder et améliorer leur système de plafonnement et échange, et la Colombie-Britannique pourra garder son système de taxe sur le carbone.

NDP — Helene Boudreau: An NDP government will work with provinces and territories to put a price on carbon and reduce emissions. We will prepare a pan-Canadian cap-and-trade system, which will establish hard emissions limits for Canada’s biggest polluters to ensure companies pay their environmental bills and to create an incentive for reducing greenhouse gas emissions. We will ensure that provincial and territorial governments can opt out of the federal plan if they have carbon pricing plans that meet or exceed federal goals. We’ll help provinces and territories co-ordinate efforts and integrate within a harmonized pan-Canadian system, and we’ll advance an integrated continental cap-and-trade system that ensures a level economic playing field for North American businesses.

Green — Kevin King: Yes, we will put a price on carbon under the fee and dividend program, giving money back to the Canadian people by taxing corporations that still produce will reduce carbon emissions. This system also is less prone to fraud as compared the Cap and Trade system that other parties propose.

 

  1. This December, world governments will attend the United Nations’ international climate conference to establish a legally-binding and universal agreement on climate action. This is an opportunity for Canada to play an influential role in global environmental affairs. What commitments does your party propose we announce in Paris to move us quickly to a low-carbon economy?

Conservative — Anne Bastarache: No response. 

Liberal — Dominic LeBlanc: Afin d’avoir un réel effet au niveau des émissions de gaz à effet de serre et des changements climatiques, nous avons besoin d’un vrai plan national et de la coopération des provinces. C’est pourquoi Justin Trudeau invitera les Premier ministres des provinces à se joindre à lui lors de la Conférence de Paris. Au lieu de tenter de mettre un frein aux négociations, comme l’ont fait les Conservateurs lors de conférences précédentes, l’inclusion des provinces nous permettra d’être plus productifs et d’arriver à une entente satisfaisante d’un océan à l’autre.

NDP — Helene Boudreau: Tom Mulcair will restore Canada’s international environmental credibility – as one of his first duties as Prime Minister, Tom will attend COP21 with targets and a plan to meet them. We will support green climate finance, based on the outcomes of the negotiations. We will also facilitate Canadians’ participation in the COP, and we’ll include Opposition Critics and Civil Society Groups on the official delegation to COP21.

Green — Kevin King: The Green Party of Canada was founded on being the voice to Canada’s climate change issue; Elizabeth May has worked very hard to convince the general population that climate change is real and now we have a full caucus of candidates that place it first ahead of all policy; economy is derived from a favorable and sound environment. As we have declined in the world opinion among other countries citizens; our image has been given a black eye do to our irresponsible practices vis-à-vis: the tar sands. Our transition towards renewables will be the example to the world that not only is it good policy, but it makes sense economically; we owe it to the future generations who will ultimately inherit this planet to act now before we have gone past the tipping point.

 

  1. Burning coal to produce electricity is the single largest source of carbon pollution in N.B. Ontario recently phased out coal. Will your party support a phase-out of coal in N.B.?

Conservative — Anne Bastarache: No response.

Liberal — Dominic LeBlanc: La décision du gouvernement libéral de l’Ontario de mettre fin aux centrales thermiques au charbon a eu un énorme impact national au niveau des émissions de gaz à effet de serre. Quand Stephen Harper se vante de la performance de son gouvernement, les gens savent que ce sont les décisions prises par les provinces qui ont eu un réel impact. Je pense que le gouvernement fédéral a la responsabilité d’aider les provinces à adopter des méthodes de production énergétique moins polluantes. Le Parti libéral a un plan d’infrastructure verte de 20 milliard de dollars, ainsi qu’un Fonds pour une économie à faibles émissions de carbone. Ces investissements, qui débuteront immédiatement, aideront les communautés et les provinces à diminuer leur consommation d’énergie polluante.

NDP — Helene Boudreau: We will support all provincial and territorial efforts to transition to a fossil fuel free future.

Green — Kevin King: Unequivocally yes – we will work hard to retrain employees in the new green sector, also by reducing energy consumption, the need for obsolete energy generation systems like coal burning will be naturally phased out and we will at all else work with stakeholders to ensure the obsolescence is done smoothly.

 

Energy

 

  1. Investment in renewable energy, energy efficiency and other green technologies will create jobs and reduce the pollution causing climate change. Will your party commit to increasing investments in energy efficiency programming and renewable energy generation?

Conservative — Anne Bastarache: No response.

Liberal — Dominic LeBlanc: Oui. Le Parti libéral a fait un choix différent de celui des autres partis. Nous avons choisis d’investir dès maintenant, ce qui nous permet de mettre en place un fonds d’infrastructure verte de 20 milliards de dollars, ainsi qu’un Fonds pour une économie à faibles émissions de carbone.

NDP — Helene Boudreau: We will invest in targeted sustainable development priorities over the next four years to tackle climate change and adapt our communities in partnership with provinces, municipalities and Indigenous governments. And an NDP Government will make it easier for Canadians and businesses to invest in a cleaner future for Canada.

Green — Kevin King: As per the Green Party of Canada platform, on page 14 it says “We will create federally-funded $1 billion per year Green Technology Commercialization Grants to accelerate emerging technologies and give Canadian entrepreneurs a head start.” This initiative is mandated to bolster innovation in this new sector and can be done by eliminating unnecessary subsidies to the already profitable oil and gas sector.

 

  1. Many Canadians and organizations are concerned the National Energy Board has become a biased regulator that isn’t making decisions in the best interest of all Canadians. Will your party commit to reviewing and amending the NEB process to make it fair and easy for communities and members of the public to provide input?

Conservative — Anne Bastarache:  No response.

Liberal — Dominic LeBlanc: Oui. Nous moderniserons l’Office national de l’énergie, veillant à ce que sa composition reflète les points de vue régionaux et compte suffisamment d’expertise dans des domaines comme la science environnementale, le développement communautaire et le savoir traditionnel autochtone. Nous allons également donner aux Canadiennes et Canadiens des moyens d’exprimer leurs opinions, et aux spécialistes la possibilité d’apporter une réelle contribution.

NDP — Helene Boudreau: The changes the Harper Government made to the mandate of the NEB when it repealed the Canadian Environmental Assessment Act have removed Environment Canada from most project reviews, and have given Cabinet an override provision that allows them to make political decisions on energy projects – all behind closed doors, making the entire process meaningless.

Green — Kevin King: While previous governments have placed its trust into the NEB, Canadians feel duped; the time for government to step in and regulate this mandate and or replace it with something new is now. Although fuel prices are relatively low here in Canada compared to other countries where gas taxes are much higher, profits have left the country and the machine has had its grips into this country for far too long. Oil and Gas lobbies have become too powerful in this country and there needs to be reform as we transition towards a greener world. Oil and Gas is directly correlated to energy, but energy is not correlated to oil and gas, the industry needs to be recalibrated and once again, the time for the mandate to be amended so that Canadians are put ahead and not industry.

 

  1. Many Canadians and organizations feel the National Energy Board’s project review process is flawed because it does not consider the upstream greenhouse gas impacts associated with energy projects. Will your party ensure upstream greenhouse gas emissions are considered in all project reviews undertaken by the National Energy Board?

Conservative — Anne Bastarache: No response.

Liberal — Dominic LeBlanc: Oui. Nous ferons en sorte que les évaluations environnementales prévoient une analyse des répercussions en amont des projets ainsi que des émissions de gaz à effet de serre qu’ils généreront.

NDP — Helene Boudreau: The Conservative government has systematically dismantled the federal environmental assessment process, and has seriously restricted public input into major project reviews. As a result, a rigorous and credible federal environmental assessment just isn’t possible. A New Democratic government will work with provinces, industry and with indigenous and other communities to revamp the federal environmental review process for the approval of major resource infrastructure such as pipelines. We will ensure that reviews are meaningful and account for a project’s impact on our climate, and that it will not conflict with our new international obligation to reduce Canada’s greenhouse gas emissions. We will also end the Conservatives’ arbitrary limits on public participation in decision making, which is one of the most important aspects of environmental assessment. We will increase the protection of communities and our environment by implementing strengthened safety standards. The federal government must also honour its legal duty to consult and accommodate First Nations. Only through a strong project review process – with sustainability at its core – can we ensure that proposals are safe for Canadians and our environment before moving forward.

Green — Kevin King: Without question, GHG emissions must be taken into place when determining process reviews, the numbers can be adjusted to favor the industry. The Government of Canada’s role must be so that standards are stringent as to eliminate flaws, therefore more emphasis must be placed in schools, more math and science grants so that future scientists have the tools they need to catch these flaws and have outlets to deliver them safely to government without fearing retribution.

 

  1. Both Ontario and Quebec have pursued independent provincial examinations of TransCanada’s proposed Energy East Pipeline. Will your party encourage the government of New Brunswick to conduct an independent Environmental Impact Assessment of the Energy East proposal in N.B.?

Conservative — Anne Bastarache: No response.

Liberal — Dominic LeBlanc: Afin que le projet d’Énergie-est aille de l’avant, les résidents des régions affectées doivent se sentir confortable avec le projet. Suite aux nombreuses compressions des Conservateurs envers la recherche scientifique et les évaluations environnementales, les gens ont perdu la confiance qu’ils avaient envers le gouvernement fédéral. C’est pourquoi nous moderniserons l’Office national de l’énergie, veillant à ce que sa composition reflète les points de vue régionaux et provinciaux, et compte suffisamment d’expertise dans des domaines comme la science environnementale, le développement communautaire et le savoir traditionnel autochtone.

NDP — Helene Boudreau: We would encourage any province to conduct its own review, but there has also got to be a robust federal review, which is not possible under the current regime.

Green — Kevin King: NO, I will not endorse any form of this pipeline whatsoever; no need for any wasted assessment, the mixture of raw bitumen and diluents will destroy all if spilled. I will wholeheartedly oppose any and all works in regards to TransCanada Energy East Pipeline.

 

  1. TransCanada’s Energy East Pipeline is one of several port expansion or shipping projects currently being proposed that would bring significantly more supertankers into the Bay of Fundy. Will your party give a mandate to Fisheries and Oceans Canada to do an assessment of marine traffic noise in the Bay of Fundy in order to determine existing impacts on marine mammals and determine tipping points of noise that would increase impacts on marine mammals in the Bay of Fundy?

Conservative — Anne Bastarache:  No response.

Liberal — Dominic LeBlanc:  Nous nous devons d’étudier tous les impacts directs et indirects de projets tels qu’Énergie-est afin d’assurer qu’ils soient sécuritaires et non-néfastes pour la santé. C’est la seule façon que nous pouvons avoir le consentement de la population pour aller de l’avant.

NDP — Helene Boudreau:  This would be part of an environmental assessment that would have to be conducted before an NDP government allowed this project to proceed.

Green — Kevin King: NO, just like the previous question, I want nothing to do with this dangerous pipelines. If the Government of Canada wanted to refine tar sands, they should build a refinery on site in Alberta and ship out processed products for maximum profits – there!

 

Nature and the environment

 

  1. Recent years have seen many of Canada’s environmental laws weakened or repealed. Will your party restore or strengthen the Fisheries Act, the Navigable Waters Protection Act, the Canadian Environmental Assessment Act, and the Species At Risk Act?

Conservative — Anne Bastarache: No response.

Liberal — Dominic LeBlanc: Les changements de Stephen Harper à la Loi sur les pêches et la Loi sur la navigables ont miné nos protections environnementales. Nous passerons ces changements en revue, rétablirons les mesures de protection abolies et en ajouterons d’autres, plus modernes. Nous consentirons également plus d’efforts à la protection des espèces menacées d’extinction au Canada. Nous répondrons plus rapidement aux recommandations et aux demandes des scientifiques, et nous mettrons sur pied des plans rigoureux pour le rétablissement des espèces en péril.

NDP — Helene Boudreau:  In the last ten years, the Conservatives have dismantled the laws protecting our air, land and water. They’ve hidden their attacks in budget bills, targeting the Navigable Waters Protection Action, the Canadian Environmental Assessment Act and the Fisheries Act. They’ve muzzled or fired scientists working on environmental research. And they’ve handed billions in subsidies to their friends in the fossil fuel industry. New democrats will protect our natural environment for future generations and reverse Stephen Harper’s damaging changes to environmental protection laws. We will update and strengthen environmental assessments. We will affirm Government’s strong role in environmental protection and assessment, ensure and support public participation in decision making, incorporate cumulative effects, regional assessments, and greenhouse gas impacts for all major projects and ensure that the Crown’s duty to consult Indigenous peoples in the environmental assessment process is upheld, and that their meaningful participation is facilitated. WE will undo damage to science and environmental protections, and restore protection to Canada’s lakes and rivers by reversing changes made to the Navigable Waters Protection Act in omnibus Budgets 2012, and we will restore habitat protection and other provisions of the Fisheries Act.

Green — Kevin King: Protecting the rights of the environment and biodiversity here in New Brunswick and Canada is vital to the future of our environment for if we do not repeal these acts of aggression against the very things that cannot defend themselves, we are doomed as species and not on our watch; the Green Party of Canada stands proud to repeal and reinstate powers to water, biodiversity and environment.

 

  1. The World Health Organization’s International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) recently classified glyphosate as a probable cancer-causing agent. In 2001, Quebec replaced the use of herbicides in its public forest with thinning crews of men and women working in the woods. Will your party require Health Canada to ban glyphosate for silvicultural treatments in Canada’s public forests?

Conservative — Anne Bastarache: No response.

Liberal — Dominic LeBlanc: Lors de ma rencontre avec Transition Beauséjour, j’ai discuté du dossier du glysophate. Bien que Santé Canada ait déterminé que ce produit ne causait pas de risque à la vie humaine, j’ai remarqué que les gens ont perdu confiance dans ces études gouvernementales. Nous créerons donc le poste de directeur scientifique, dont le titulaire fera en sorte que la population puisse accéder a? l’ensemble des travaux scientifiques du gouvernement, que les scientifiques puissent parler librement de leurs travaux et que le gouvernement tienne compte de leurs analyses dans ses décisions. De mon côté, une fois ces mesures prises en place, j’aimerais que Santé Canada débute une nouvelle étude sur les effets du glysophate, afin que les résultats soient publics et jugés crédibles par tous les intervenants.

NDP — Helene Boudreau: The Pest Management Regulatory Agency under Health Canada approves pesticides for use in Canada. All pesticides have inherent hazards, as well as benefits when used in prescribed circumstances. Science cannot say glyphosate, or any other pesticide designed to kill a biological organism, is safe. Scientific evidence is immensely broader than the toxicological (laboratory animal) risk assessment on which the PMRA primarily relies. The PMRA has not developed a systematic process to incorporate epidemiology, studying humans in the real world, in risk assessment. In fact, until recently the PMRA has actually not even had an epidemiologist on staff. The NDP would look at conducting a review of the approvals process, and of the approval of glyphosate, taking into consideration the epidemiological risks, evaluating the availability of alternatives, and operationalizing the precautionary principle.

Green — Kevin King: I want to see a ban of glysophate done immediately. In not only destroys everything in its path such as the biodiversity and plant life, but it poses a direct health risk to animals that forage and people that live near it. Cancer is prevalent in areas where spraying is done and this directly affects the health costs in the provinces that use it. It must be banned; the people come first before crown corporations’ costs of operations.

 

  1. Business leaders, commercial and recreational fishing associations, scientists, lawyers and environmentalists called on the federal government to not pass the Aquaculture Activities Regulations, stressing they would reduce oversight of the aquaculture industry and increase access to highly toxic pesticides for use in the ocean. Would your party repeal or amend the Aquaculture Activities Regulations to increase enforcement and oversight and limit access to toxic pesticides?

Conservative — Anne Bastarache: No response.

Liberal — Dominic LeBlanc: Stephen Harper a retranché 40 millions de dollars aux programmes de recherche océanographique et de surveillance des océans menés par le gouvernement fédéral. Nous rétablirons ce financement pour assurer la vitalité de nos stocks de poissons, contrôler les contaminants et la pollution présents dans nos océans et soutenir une industrie aquacole durable et responsable sur nos côtes. Lorsqu’il s’agit des stocks de poissons et de la gestion de notre écosystème, nos décisions reposeront sur des données scientifiques et sur le principe de précaution, et elles tiendront compte des changements climatiques. Nous améliorerons aussi la cogestion de nos océans en collaborant avec les provinces, les territoires, les peuples autochtones et les autres intervenants. Ensemble, nous élaborerons des plans pour mieux utiliser nos ressources marines et pour que les communautés côtières puissent davantage participer à la gestion de leur environnement.

NDP — Helene Boudreau: The changes to the Fisheries Act made by the Conservative government have stripped the key protections from the law – New Democrats will reverse these changes. And the deposit of deleterious substances in fish bearing waters was, and should be, illegal. We must take steps towards achieving a balanced approach to a sustainable industry in our rural and coastal communities. It is very important that we commit to protecting the environment and traditional fisheries as they further develop the aquaculture industry. That include strengthening the monitoring and enforcement mechanisms of the industry.

Green — Kevin King: I would not endorse any act that promotes placing contaminants into the environment, be it land or sea; heavy penalties must be enforced to discourage anyone or organization from acting recklessly

 

  1. In the past, Canada’s support for public science and science funding was the envy of many developed nations. Will your party commit to increasing support for public science and restoring science funding to Environment Canada and the Department of Fisheries and Oceans?

Conservative — Anne Bastarache: No response.

Liberal — Dominic LeBlanc: Oui. Que ce soit au niveau des fonds octroyés à la recherche universitaire, qui donnent trop d’importance à la commercialisation, ou aux données scientifiques qui sont ignorées ou éliminées par les Conservateurs, nous devons mieux faire. Nous annulerons les règles et les règlements qui musellent les scientifiques fédéraux et nous leur permettrons de parler librement de leurs travaux. Nous regrouperons dans un portail central les travaux scientifiques du gouvernement afin de les rendre facilement accessibles au grand public, et nous créerons le poste de directeur scientifique, dont le mandat sera notamment d’assurer que les travaux scientifiques du gouvernement sont accessibles au public gratuitement, et de permettre aux scientifiques de parler librement de leur travail, et que le gouvernement tienne bien compte des analyses scientifiques lorsqu’il prend des décisions.

NDP — Helene Boudreau: Tom Mulcair and the NDP will restore the voice of scientists in Canada.  We will create a Scientific Advisory Council to the Prime Minister headed by a Chief Science Advisor to ensure that our government always has access to the best possible scientific advice from experts in all fields. We will immediately move to restore the mandatory long form census and provide the necessary funding to ensure it can be included in the 2016 census. We will put an end to the Conservatives’ policy of muzzling scientists and ensure that Canada’s leading experts are freely available to speak to the media and to publish their findings. We will implement the NDP’s comprehensive plan to promote the voice of scientist’s in Ottawa as laid out in M-453 to promote scientific integrity. We will work to re-establish scientific capacity in government departments, including Environment Canada and the Department of Fisheries and Oceans. We will establish the Office of the Parliamentary Science Officer as per Bill C-558 to ensure that parliamentarians have the best possible access to science-based analysis.

Green — Kevin King: The previous government’s action towards its scientists have single-handedly given Canada the black eye it merits for its behavior; the manipulation of sound science in lieu of evidence for profit has in a decade promoted irresponsible practices and as a result, climate change and other downward trends have appeared. Without prejudice, I will move towards strengthening the Canadian science community and ensure that it has clear avenues to Ottawa.

 

  1. Water is a special resource in that it crosses provincial and federal boundaries, presenting unique challenges for those responsible for the health of our rivers and waterways.  Does your party support the development of a national water strategy?

Conservative — Anne Bastarache: No response.

Liberal — Dominic LeBlanc: En ce qui a trait à l’eau, nous allons imposer des évaluations environnementales plus rigoureuses et crédibles avant tout projet qui pourrait avoir des répercussions sur nos plans d’eau douce et nos océans. Nous rétablirons le financement annuel de 1,5 million de dollars accordé à la recherche sur l’eau douce, supprimé par les conservateurs, et nous consentirons de nouveaux investissements dans la Région des lacs expérimentaux, un centre de recherche canadien de renommée mondiale placé sous l’égide de l’Institut international du développement durable. Nous réparerons également les conséquences de l’inaction des conservateurs en faisant passer la superficie des zones marines et côtières protégées à 5 % d’ici 2017 et à 10 % d’ici 2020. Pour y arriver, nous investirons huit millions de dollars par année dans les consultations et l’expertise scientifique.

NDP — Helene Boudreau: In the last ten years, the Conservatives have dismantled the laws protecting our air, land and especially our water. They’ve hidden their attacks in budget bills, targeting the Navigable Waters Protection Act, the Environmental Assessment Act, the Species at Risk Act, and the Fisheries Act. Under their changes, Canada went from protecting over 2.5 million lakes and rivers to only parts of 159. And they have failed to address contaminated sites, protect fish stocks, and introduce legislation to protect water from bulk exports, or enact drinking water standards. The NDP believe this is unacceptable. We will introduce a federal Safe Drinking Water Act to support provinces and municipalities in their efforts to keep the drinking water of all Canadians safe. We will introduce legislation banning the bulk export of water across international boundaries. We will establish and implement a Pan-Canadian Plan for Water, in collaboration with the provinces, territories and Indigenous governments, and in consultation with the public to address water quality and quantity across jurisdictions, and which considers the impacts of climate change on current and future water resources, and we will restore legal protections for water that were stripped away by the Conservatives.

Green — Kevin King: Water is the most precious resources on the planet; potable water is being wasted and water tables are disappearing. The Government of Canada must do all it can to protect this precious resource as we near seven billion worldwide people who depend on it for agriculture and other related needs. I endorse the creation of a national water strategy as to ensure potable drinking water is protected for the remainder of history from our coast to coast to coast.

 

  1. Health Impact Assessments (HIAs) are an important tool for evaluating proposed policies, programs or projects with an eye toward minimizing the negative health impacts and maximizing the positive health impacts. Will your party include an HIA as a requirement of all Environmental Impact Assessments?

 

Conservative — Anne Bastarache: No response.

Liberal — Dominic LeBlanc: Tous impacts directs ou indirects sur la population doivent être pris en considération lors de l’évaluation de politiques et de projet. Alors que les Conservateurs ont tenté d’éliminé autant de mécanismes d’évaluation qu’ils le pouvaient, nous allons leur rendre la crédibilité qu’ils ont perdu, rendre publique l’information scientifique qui en découle et avoir un gouvernement qui tend vers les conclusions scientifiques au lieu de l’idéologie.

NDP — Helene Boudreau: We would review Environmental Impact Assessments in line with modernizing them and ensuring that all relevant impacts are considered. Currently, Regulatory Impact Assessment Statements include, on occasion, health effects in consideration, but this should be made consistent across the board.

Green — Kevin King: Any and all projects must be accompanied by a HIA; only through strong science based evidence can we mitigate health costs associated with them. Health costs are rising at a tremendous rate and prevention is how to eliminate debt burden associated with them.

 

  1. Families and food service industries are becoming more concerned about where and how their food is grown and processed. Will your party increase investments in the Department of Agriculture and Agri-Food’s buy local and local food initiatives?

Conservative — Anne Bastarache: No response.

Liberal — Dominic LeBlanc:  Quand je vais aux Marchés de Beauséjour, que ce soit à Dieppe, Shediac, Sackville ou Bouctouche, avant le malheureux feu qui s’y est produit, je suis toujours fier de pouvoir acheter des aliments qui proviennent de nos communautés. Nous devons appuyer nos fermiers et agriculteurs afin qu’ils puissent continuer à produire des aliments de si haute qualité. Le Parti libéral va investir 160 millions de dollars, re?partis sur quatre anne?es, dans un fonds d’investissement pour l’agroalimentaire a? valeur ajoute?e. Cela aidera l’industrie à développer de nouveaux marchés à l’extérieur de nos frontières, tout en leur permettant de continuer de développer les marchés locaux qui sont friands des aliments produits par nos fermiers et agriculteurs.

NDP — Helene Boudreau: Everybody eats. New Democrats understand that food matters, from farm to factory to fork. Working with the provinces and territories, we need to improve access to healthy food for every Canadian, ensure sustainable agricultural communities and resources, and promote Canadian food here at home and around the world. Canada is without a comprehensive food policy—lagging behind other industrial countries in the OECD, like England and Australia. The United Nations Special Rapporteur on the Right to Food has raised serious concerns about food security in Aboriginal communities and the lack of a coordinated food strategy in Canada. More than 2 million Canadians are at risk of going hungry, compromising our families, our health care system and our children’s potential. New Democrats have a vision for our food system–one that connects Canadians from farm to fork. We need to look at the whole picture and bring an integrated approach to federal policy that connects agriculture, rural development, health and income security. It can be done. We want to see a thriving agricultural sector. Agriculture and food are major drivers of the Canadian economy, nourishing our population and providing one out of eight jobs. Today’s farmers are modern farmers, and they need to be linked to cutting-edge research and market information. Our rural communities need investment and infrastructure, and to be linked to growing urban markets. We also need to make sure that agricultural development is sustainable and protects critical watersheds and natural environments. Ensuring that Canadians have healthy, affordable food is a national priority. Focusing on healthy food now means a healthier population down the road. Our vision of a pan-Canadian food strategy ensures that everyone eats well, that our agricultural communities are sustainable for generations to come, and that Canadian products find growing markets at home and abroad.

Green — Kevin King: The Green Technology Commercialization Grants can be used in agriculture as the amount of water needed towards this sector is reduced; technology is how we will feed the people in the 21st century. Sustainable, organic food can be produced at home at a reduced price further increasing the home-economy and allowing the people to get out of household debt. Urban farming, rural hobby farming and aquaponics are just a few ways how the people WILL migrate towards a more sustainable food strategy.