Dave Epp
- Born
- June 10, 1962
- Career
- Farmer
- Political Experience
- Elected to represent the riding of Chatham-Kent—Leamington in the House of Commons of Canada in the 2019 Canadian federal election
Based on publicly available information — may contain inaccuracies
Business & Financial Interests
Before entering federal politics, Dave Epp was a third-generation farmer in Leamington, Ontario. He was a partner in Lycoland Farms Ltd., a family-owned agricultural business that grows cash crops and vegetables. His public disclosures with the Office of the Conflict of Interest and Ethics Commissioner have listed this farm as a declarable asset. Epp has also been involved in agricultural organizations. He reportedly served as the chair of the Ontario Processing Vegetable Growers and was a director for the Ontario Farmers' Vegetable Growers' Marketing Board.
Public Controversies
In 2021, Dave Epp was one of several Conservative MPs who reportedly hired a summer student through the Canada Summer Jobs program who was publicly associated with an anti-abortion group. The decision drew criticism from pro-choice advocates who questioned the use of the federal program for such a hiring. Epp also received media attention for voting against Bill C-6, a bill designed to ban conversion therapy. He explained his vote by stating that while he opposed the practice of conversion therapy, he believed the bill's definition was too broad and could unintentionally criminalize private conversations. The bill ultimately passed with support from many Conservative MPs.
Where Dave falls on key policy spectrums
Your Money
People & Society
How We're Governed
Land & Community
Dave Epp won with 41,612 votes (57.5%)
Total votes cast: 72,351
How does Dave Epp's voting record line up with your values?
Madam Speaker, I understand that my colleague's roots are in the farm fields of Portage—Lisgar, just as mine are from those in Chatham-Kent—Leamington. We both share professional experience in ag organizations prior to our parliamentary life here. Where we diverge, however, is that his daughter is younger than both of my granddaughters, but that is not for debate today. On Tuesday, we debated
Thank you. I have one question. You and I both attended the Transport Futures summit on Friday. Alto was on the program. They trumpeted their consultation process as being wide-ranging and so open. That was not the testimony that came from many of the other panellists there. Would you concur? At the end of that session, there was a QR code. We could address, after the day, what the support was.
Thank you. Also vital to food security is, of course, efficient access to good farmland. Farm groups are asking for more meaningful consultation, yet the government is saying that they have already been consulted. Why do they keep coming to us? Why have UPA, the OFA, the NFU, the CFFO and the UCFO penned a letter asking for a pause on the Alto project?
Thank you, sir. Thank you to your family for your service to agriculture. To the Canadian Federation of Agriculture, you represent farmers across the country. There's not only Alto; there are other infrastructure projects. What is the process that you would like to see? Have you seen a business case for Alto? Should, as was alluded to in previous testimony, the value of the potential loss of
Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
—alternatives that don't affect the cutting up of—
Just a number.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. Thank you to all the witnesses for your appearance today. Let me begin, Mr. McWilliams, by saying thank you for Hay West and for your work in your community on food aid. It's an example to all of us. You mentioned a number of stresses that your farm has gone through, and now there's Alto. Can you describe the level of stress and the uncertainty with respect to the
In your testimony, sir, you also referenced taxpayers. Why did you raise the point of taxpayers?
It could very well be that it would be in the national interest to build projects that remove farmland, but I'm hearing you say that this has to be evaluated in a business case. Have you seen that? I'm told that six different options were examined for Alto. I haven't seen the business cases. Has the CFA reviewed the different options? Have you seen the impacts on farmland as they were examined
I'll gladly do an over-under with you, Mr. Minister. A report by HEC Montréal, Université Laval and the University of Waterloo on the high-speed rail project between Québec City and Toronto issued some recommendations and asked how many farms were being affected. You say that the corridor hasn't even been picked. Has your department even looked at alternatives? Have you lobbied for far
Okay. Switching topics, the last time the PMRA, now the PRD, received a dollop of money—$81 million over about a four-year period—we ended up with a transformation project and a citizen science panel. That was supposed to speed things up. It did not. It slowed things down. Where does the confidence from the agri-food sector come from with this last announcement of additional funds?
Thank you, Mr. Chair. Minister, vital to food security is, of course, a continued investment in research. Fifty-four per cent of the cuts are to the workforce of the science and innovation branch, 75% of the spending that's already been tabled here. However, you did state that the scientists are being offered relocation. Can you tell us how many are staying within the branch? We have had direct
How can there be a $90-billion price tag that we can have confidence in if the route hasn't been placed and we don't know how many catapults are going to be installed to transport farm equipment or livestock across the track?
Thank you, Mr. Chair. Wayne Edinger has proposed, through the OFA, a number of different alternatives that are far cheaper and don't require a new corridor. Has that been discussed at all by the government?
You have testified to us at committee that farmers' concerns about their farms being split will be addressed. They will get access. If that's going to be the case, can you define that? Is it catapults, tunnels, bridges? Is that every 50 acres, every 25 acres?