House of Commons photo

Crucial Fact

  • Her favourite word was social.

Last in Parliament September 2008, as Liberal MP for Oakville (Ontario)

Lost her last election, in 2008, with 37% of the vote.

Statements in the House

Smart Regulation May 29th, 2007

Mr. Speaker, I want to alert my colleagues to regulatory changes that are being made without parliamentary oversight.

Under the seemingly harmless name of “smart regulation”, rules and standards are being weakened in ways that could threaten the health and safety of Canadians.

Whether it is therapeutic products, food safety or transportation safety, there is an effort to make our regulations more friendly to business and more profitable for them.

All this is part of the security and prosperity partnership of North America and its subset, the council on competitiveness. This entire partnership is so profoundly undemocratic that to date 14 American states have passed resolutions demanding that the American Congress act to cease American involvement in it.

It is time that we in this House took action as well to ensure democratic oversight of this ongoing effort to more deeply integrate our nation with our neighbours to the south.

Business of Supply May 17th, 2007

Mr. Chair, under the new detainee monitoring agreement, what plans has the minister activated to ensure that sufficient resources and sufficient personnel are available for the regular monitoring that this agreement envisages?

Business of Supply May 17th, 2007

Yes, Mr. Chair, and the Canadian army still has the highest rate of injury and death among those three nations. I am wondering if this is part of his success in operations.

Business of Supply May 17th, 2007

Mr. Chair, I am wondering whether the minister approves of the aggressive and high risk combat style that is being used in Afghanistan, a style that has resulted in the highest percentage of troop loss and injury of any NATO nation involved, including those fighting by our side in Kandahar province.

Business of Supply May 17th, 2007

Mr. Chair, the minister said in his formal estimates statement tonight that he wants Canadian soldiers to achieve success in operations. May I ask what he is measuring success by in his operations in Afghanistan?

Summer Career Placement Program May 17th, 2007

Mr. Speaker, for years the Oakville Economic Development Alliance has employed summer students to staff its tourism centre, but yesterday it was told it did not qualify for funding this year.

This is the first time it has ever been refused funding by the federal government and now it does not know how its centre will be staffed. Just as the tourism season heats up, why has the government left the Oakville tourism centre in the lurch?

Pesticide Management May 14th, 2007

Mr. Speaker, the health minister has claimed that his government's decisions are based on science and has promised he would not lower the level of safety, but the United States discovered, for example, that the fungicide vinclozolin can result in abnormalities in living things over multiple generations. A Health Canada report noted similar findings.

If Canada bows to the U.S. on this, it would allow eight times as much vinclozolin as it does now. Can the minister tell the House on what scientific analysis he based his decision?

Pesticide Management May 14th, 2007

Mr. Speaker, last week the Prime Minister demonstrated that he was willing to roll over again instead of standing up to the U.S., this time on pesticide regulations.

The health minister claims that increasing the residue levels somehow represents the highest of standards when it comes to protecting the health of Canadians. Why has the government increased pesticide exposure for Canadians instead of insisting that the United States come up to our standards?

Food and Drugs Act May 14th, 2007

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased today to have the opportunity to speak in support of Bill C-251. I want to compliment my colleague from Mississauga South who has been the embodiment of determination and persistence on this topic.

As previous speakers have pointed out, fetal alcohol spectrum disorder is a tragic yet entirely preventable health issue, and the mandatory labelling of alcoholic beverages will be an integral part of any prevention strategy.

I disagree strongly with those who have suggested that such labelling should be avoided because it might have economic impacts on the producers of alcoholic beverages. I note that these sentiments are being expressed by the same party that recently announced its intention of increasing the levels of allowable toxin residues on our fruit and vegetables because the agri-business transnationals consider our current standards to be a trade irritant in our commerce with the United States.

Suggesting that labelling is not effective is clearly hypocritical. If it does not work, then the beverage producers have nothing to fear from this bill. Their sales will continue to rise. The fact is that labelling does work. It may not be a perfect or complete solution, but it is certainly going to help and be an integral part of a comprehensive prevention strategy.

Suggesting that Canadians should take a back seat to the profits of corporations is not only highly offensive, it is plainly irresponsible for legislators, in my opinion. If some members of this House truly have concerns about the economic implications of Bill C-251, then they should be strongly in favour of it. Any minor impact to alcohol beverage producers from some envisioned lost market share of pregnant women will be dwarfed by the savings to the Canadian health care system which has to treat the victims of FASD throughout their lives. On both moral and economic grounds, this bill makes eminently good sense.

I would also like to point out to the House that FASD is part of a vicious circle that entraps citizens in a cycle of mental illness and addiction. If a woman consumes alcohol while pregnant and gives birth to a child with FASD, that child is going to face particular challenges at school and in trying to grow up. They will experience the frustration of not getting it at school and not knowing why they are not getting it as well as the frustration of being embarrassed by a poor report card which they will not understand the reason for. All these things will not encourage regular school attendance. School will become an unhappy place, a place to be avoided.

Once branded as a truancy problem, chances are good that the branding will become a behaviour problem and the downward spiral will begin. Serious unhappiness and frustration can lead adolescents to seek comfort in mood altering substances like alcohol and illegal drugs, and overuse of such substances in adolescence can lead to mental health disorders later on.

However, mental health costs are just part of the costs incurred. Often it includes child welfare, special education, youth justice and youth corrections, so the taxpayers are paying for these social problems that seem to come with FASD.

Another fact is that the cost to the federal and provincial governments for youth who drop out of school for lack of mental health treatment is $1.9 billion, and that is just the federal government and the province of Ontario. What the other provinces would add, I am not sure.

If the child with FASD is a female, then she is at high risk of behaviours during her own pregnancies that would lead to her own children suffering from FASD, and the cycle continues. Sadly, it is a cycle that afflicts many people who suffer from mental illness and addictions. We should be doing all we can to stop this cycle from perpetuating itself.

I believe that Bill C-251 is a step in the right direction. I would urge all members of the House to support this simple measure. It could have a dramatic impact on Canada's future health care costs and more important, on the lives of Canadians yet unborn.

Security and Prosperity Partnership May 4th, 2007

Mr. Speaker, I would like to draw the attention of the House to the security and prosperity partnership. This partnership was initiated in 2005 by the governments of Canada, the United States and Mexico to increase cooperation and commerce within North America, but it is not a signed treaty and has never been brought before the legislatures of North America for discussion or committee oversight.

Its implementation has now been handed over to 10 corporate CEOs from each country who meet behind closed doors with senior civil servants and military personnel. They are not recommending new legislation, but are focusing on changes to regulations. This precludes the participation of legislators and therefore leaves out the people of Canada.

We, the elected representatives of the Canadian people, need to assert democratic control over this effort and ensure that it is fully transparent and in the interest of all Canadians, not just an economically powerful few.