House of Commons photo

Crucial Fact

  • Her favourite word was let.

Last in Parliament May 2004, as Canadian Alliance MP for Edmonton North (Alberta)

Won her last election, in 2000, with 51% of the vote.

Statements in the House

National Citizenship Week April 20th, 1994

Mr. Speaker, it is my understanding that when we asked the Table and the clerks about this, it was in order. It was given back to me saying that it was in order and we could proceed with it. I appreciate the generosity of the member and, barring unanimous consent in the Chamber now when we are on national TV, that the secondary way we could proceed is as he suggested.

As an individual member I believe I have every right and privilege to ask if there is unanimous consent for the motion so I would like the Chair to put the motion to see if there is unanimous consent for it.

National Citizenship Week April 20th, 1994

Mr. Speaker, as members know, music is one of the most effective ways of communicating our love for Canada. In this week of national citizenship some of us participated in the Hall of Honour yesterday reaffirming our oath.

We sang "O Canada" like it has never been sung before, I am sure, in these halls. In every one of our constituencies there are gifted individuals, choirs, et cetera. Unfortunately music is conspicuously absent from the daily proceedings here in Parliament. After having given notice to the other two official parties in the House I am seeking unanimous consent for the following motion:

That Standing Order 30 be amended by adding the following words: "and shall cause Canada's National Anthem to be played or sung in the House every Wednesday immediately preceding oral questions".

I think you would find unanimous consent in the House for that, Mr. Speaker.

Federal Government April 19th, 1994

Mr. Speaker, Canadians thought when this government was elected that they might hear and witness something new.

Much to the disappointment of millions of Canadians all they got was the same old thing.

We have a government that announces with greatest fanfare a rehash of the Company of Young Canadians, basically Katimavik II; a great concept but are our youth willing to pay the bill on this borrowed money?

Ministers go to Atlantic Canada to tell Canadians there are no bold new ideas, just the usual tired old programs through which borrowed money substitutes for innovative job creation initiatives.

The experiments in judicial reform that have proved unsuccessful since their introduction in the 1960s and 1970s are another sign that creative solutions are not being found.

I would remind the government that yesterday's answers will not work when applied to today's questions; old songs by new singers are still old songs.

We need a new song for the new Canada. Reformers together with Canadians are working on the lyrics and the tune for "O Canada, New Canada".

Electoral Boundaries Readjustment Suspension Act, 1994 April 12th, 1994

S.O.S. Save our seats.

Electoral Boundaries Readjustment Suspension Act, 1994 April 12th, 1994

An hon. member says: "Do it now". He is concerned about doing it now. I would like to ask why now is so important if we have spent $5 million on it. The reason now is so important is that the hearings have started. People are getting to view and voice their concerns publicly. I suspect it would seem very obvious across the country that the public is asking why the hurry. There have been the Charlottetown and Meech Lake accords. I could go on and on. Why the hurry? Why the rush?

Something is underground that needs to surface, that needs to be discussed in the public hearings. Let us not do it now. Let the public hearings go on. Let people talk about it and make representations to the commissioners.

They laugh on the other side of the House. It is most unfortunate. There is no need to proceed with this in crisis mode, as crisis intervention. This is the process put in place. Let us follow that process. Let us see what comes of these public hearings. Then let us have the government make some wise and reasoned recommendations after the public hearings, certainly not before.

Electoral Boundaries Readjustment Suspension Act, 1994 April 12th, 1994

Yes, different seats. The same pair of seats then, forgive me. Maybe we are saving a lot of money then. I had better get on with Bill C-18 as soon as possible.

We had an interesting talk on the plane about this whole idea and what it is that is happening here. All of us on both sides of the House need to look at it. Why is something being rammed through as quickly as possible? My antennae go up as soon as I see something like that. I suspect the Canadian public feels very much the same way. As soon as it sees something going into a crisis mode it wants to stop, wait, look and ask why we are being thrown into a crisis mode all of a sudden.

The issue here is the fact this is being rammed through Parliament so quickly. It was most unfortunate for people on the government side that we had to take Easter recess. This was something we know they wanted to ram through on the eve of Easter recess. It was a pity for the government. It was in a flap because it could not get this thing pushed through.

Antennae should go up right across the country when we see something like that happening. We should be asking questions. Why the rush? I do not see the need for the rush, quite frankly, except of course we know the timetable is in place for the current process to have the public hearings start very soon. That then demands there be a crisis for the government because it wants to cut that debate. It wants to shut down and put a lid on the public having any process or any input into these hearings. When people on the government benches go into the crisis mode saying to stop this thing cold and shut it down, then one wonders why this public process is being thwarted.

No, the process was not perfect before. However as soon as we see whatever process is in place, warts, flaws and all of the problems with it, it is a process that has been put into place and the public has not given a great outcry. There has not been a crisis from time to time except in Parliament because people are

self-serving and they see that maybe they stand to lose their ridings.

I have mentioned I am one of those people. Beaver River as we know it now and as we love it stands to be eliminated under the current process. If we are typical politicians therefore, of all people I should probably be self-serving and say that I am going to lose my riding and I am going to hang on to it just as hard as I can. No.

The public is saying: "Let us go to those public hearings. Let us make representation. Let us voice some of our concerns with this current process. Let us not just slam the thing shut". If we are looking at how democratic that really is surely to goodness that is the farthest thing from true democracy.

Before I get into some of the things I heard during my spring tour when I was home, some of the concerns that people have about this process, let me just say it is so frustrating to watch this matter unfold from the inside out. We are looking at something which is going to go to the other place and get thumped through there as quickly as possible. It does make one nervous.

I know it makes many government members nervous as well. It is sad to say the lid has been put on them too in saying: "Oh no, just let those members talk about it". Talk about it we will because it is something that needs to be talked about. We say if there are going to be public hearings let them go ahead. Let the public be heard on this.

In my constituency over the last couple of weeks I conducted my full spring tour of town hall meetings and many other meetings. Following are some of the things I heard.

They are concerned about the process as it is in place now. Let us call it the old process. There are frustrations with it. It is not perfect. However, they are willing to take their lumps and go through the procedures that are set up and put in place. If it is public hearings they must go to, then it is public hearings they will go to. If that is their chance on providing input according to the Constitution and the way this has been carried out for years and years regarding redistribution and limits, then they will do it because that is the process set in place. They are willing to abide by those rules and regulations.

Any number of people asked me again and again: "When are the hearings scheduled for this area, Deborah?" There is concern that they will be at one o'clock in the afternoon when most good people are busy about their day's work. They do have frustrations about that.

Let me assure you they have far more reservations and frustrations about something which is going to be thrown in place. Over and above that, to put the kibosh on this particular process and waste the $5 million that has already been spent to have politicians come up with something better?

I mentioned this in second reading. If you think there are fingerprints on the present process let me assure you there are bigger and blacker fingerprints on any process that will come up as a result of Bill C-18. I can guarantee that because I know exactly what it is that people are feeling. Government members know this and feel it as well.

Many people were pleased that the whole matter will be put on ice. I must say the people in the constituency of Beaver River appreciate it. They like the name. It is a generic name for an area that has any amount of history. I know there is a Beaver River in Ontario as well. My friend and I have talked about that.

Beaver River is a significant area in northeastern Alberta. The voyageurs and the water runners went up the Beaver River and portaged a few miles across to the Athabasca River and then went up north. Historically it is an incredibly exciting area of northeastern Alberta. The best part of its being called Beaver River is that it is an area and not a particular place. There is a store and a little community of Beaver River, but it is a waterway we are looking at and an area with history attached to it.

The new name of this constituency will be Vegreville-St. Paul, if and when the old goes through, if the government for some fluke does not manage to push C-18 through. Who knows what will happen in the other place and whether Bill C-18 will really go through or not.

Looking at the old process, the way it is going right now, if Beaver River is eliminated the new constituency will be called Vegreville-St. Paul. Let me reiterate what I heard from people on my spring tour, for example the mayor of Bonnyville which is north and east of St. Paul, far north and east of Vegreville, and people in the community of Grand Centre-Cold Lake which is far north and east again of Bonnyville. As soon as you pick a place, i.e., Vegreville-St. Paul, people in those communities say: "Let us assure you, there is life beyond St. Paul".

People have real concerns about the name. They want to know why it is that a particular town or a couple of towns are named. I see their point. They make that point well. Let us look at an area rather than singling out one or two towns. I appreciate their viewpoints. I am committed to doing everything I can, whether it is under the old process or the new, to say this is a region, an area. We have gifts. We have abilities in this particular area. Maybe it is wiser yet to celebrate the fact of an area or a group rather than zeroing in on one or two towns. As soon as one town is named then somewhere else is omitted. They are worried about that.

People question why these particular boundaries. Of course the government benches would say it was a Tory mapmaker. Maybe it was but I have no knowledge of that. I do know they were appointments to the commission from the Speaker of the House. However what about Liberal mapmakers? Could there be such a thing as a Liberal cartographer in this country, heaven

forbid? If this were going to happen it might amaze us all to discover that in fact there are Liberal mapmakers in Canada. What process is there in Bill C-18 that would exempt us from naming, heaven forbid, a Liberal mapmaker?

We can see how flawed the process is when somebody goes into crisis mode or when somebody decides we have to do it now. It makes me think of a homebuilding ad: why wait for spring; do it now.

Electoral Boundaries Readjustment Suspension Act, 1994 April 12th, 1994

Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank the hon. member for Kamloops. He and I flew west on the same plane and the same seat when we were going home before the Easter break.

Government Expenditures March 24th, 1994

Mr. Speaker, those who travel with the parliamentary associations are not paying their own way. The taxpayers are paying their way.

One final supplementary question for the Minister of Finance, still on the theme of business as usual.

It is reported that a poll commissioned by the human resources department cost $250,000. Would the Minister of Finance in his efforts to trim the deficit, as I know he is concerned, investigate whether this was the lowest bid the department of human resources received or whether the most competitive bid which was recommended by the department was passed over by the minister in favour of his hometown pollster?

Government Expenditures March 24th, 1994

Mr. Speaker, we would love a definition of what infrastructure is and if it includes Saddledomes and hockey stadiums, then we do have to ask questions.

I have a supplementary question for the Minister of Finance also on the topic of business as usual.

Two separate squadrons of members of Parliament and senators are lifting off for Paris in the springtime. One of those groups will be accompanied by spouses at taxpayers' expense.

Will the minister explain to his colleagues that compounding the wastefulness of an already useless junket makes his efforts to cut the deficit that much harder?

Government Expenditures March 24th, 1994

Mr. Speaker, it has become apparent that the government is practising business as usual. The red book

promised: "A Liberal government will reduce grants to business". Once elected that very same Liberal government begins shovelling money over to its friends in business.

My question is for the Minister of Finance. How does he justify the full blast operation of what Terence Corcoran calls the Ottawa grant machine in defiance of the government's own red book?