House of Commons photoWon his last election, in 2021, with 48% of the vote.
The Environment February 1st, 2016
Mr. Speaker, Canadians are becoming very frustrated as they wait for the Liberal government to tell them what its climate change plan looks like and how much it will cost Canadian consumers and taxpayers.
Last Friday, the minister met with her provincial and territorial counterparts in secret and then announced nothing, simply that they had all met. There was no plan, no strategy, no economic assessment, not even a substantive progress report.
Where is the plan? What happened to transparency?
Ron Sweeney January 29th, 2016
Mr. Speaker, today I honour the passing of a remarkable man, friend, and long-time Abbotsford resident, Ron Sweeney. Ron passed away peacefully this past November.
As a much loved and visionary educator, Mr. Sweeney inspired generations of students to achieve their full potential. As an athlete and coach, he is fondly remembered by many for the Sweeney Hockey League and the many teams he supported.
He served on city council and countless community organizations and was the inspiration behind the popular Sweeney Family Singers. Above all, Ron was a man of deep faith and received from Pope Benedict XVI, the Benemerenti medal for his service to the Catholic church. He was also the worthy recipient of the Order of Abbotsford.
He leaves behind his wife Mary, their seven children and spouses, 29 grandchildren and 20 great grandchildren.
On behalf of the residents of Abbotsford, I honour his enduring love for others that has inspired thousands of our citizens to live full and meaningful lives. I thank him.
The Environment January 27th, 2016
Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank the minister for her comments on the UN Climate Change Conference in Paris. It is my first opportunity to welcome her to her job and I do wish her well.
I am pleased to note that the new government continues to use the nationally determined contributions set by our Conservative government, namely a 30% reduction of GHG emissions over 2005 levels by the year 2030. These targets are ambitious and much work needs to be done in order to meet them within the required time frame.
That said, and despite the language of inclusivity and positivity infused throughout the minister's speech, I would like to take this opportunity to remind her of some of the very real challenges she faces.
The minister, of course, is right to point out that Canadians do experience the impacts of climate change, especially right here in Canada and especially in northern communities.
That is exactly why we are concerned that one of the very first actions of the government after the election was to drop a bombshell on Canadians.
To the surprise of everyone, the Prime Minister announced, without warning or consultation, that he was spending more than $2 billion of additional taxpayers' money on climate change initiatives not within Canada but outside Canada in foreign countries. Over $2 billion.
This is money that is being spent abroad without a climate change plan, without a clear idea of who will receive the money and without any assurance the money will be spent as intended. What happened to the minister's commitment to “Address this challenge through concrete actions here at home”?
I want to be clear that we understand Canada's responsibility to help the less fortunate countries of our world and Canada has always done its part. However, the government is sending billions of dollars to the United Nations and other agencies without consulting Canadians, without clear oversight, and without effective control over how the money will be spent. Where is the transparency the Prime Minister and his government were boasting about?
It is our view that the government's priorities right now should be to invest in Canada first under a clear defensible plan to address our own environmental challenges before throwing more money at unelected and often unaccountable agencies outside of Canada. Canadians deserve better.
The minister rightly pointed to last month's Speech from the Throne which stated that protecting the environment and growing the economy go hand in hand. But what she failed to repeat was the actual promise in the text, namely, “Working together, the Government will continue to provide leadership as Canada works toward putting a price on carbon--”.
While the minister used today's statement to proudly boast of her government's wild spending on foreign green initiatives, I would have hoped that she would have also addressed the actual elephant in the room and that is to say, what additional burden does she intend to place on Canadian consumers and businesses?
What additional price does she intend to place on carbon? What devastation will she wreak upon hard-working Canadian families at a time when our economy is facing such significant headwinds? How many more Canadians will lose their jobs because of her policies? Does she not realize the dire straits facing our energy sector?
Those are the questions the minister refused to answer today. Where is the leadership and where is the transparency? With a Liberal government which speaks so fervently about transparency and inclusivity, I am perplexed that these fundamental policy questions were not even addressed today.
Yes, we must, as the minister states, use a spirit of co-operation to fight climate change, but we cannot very well co-operate if she spends billions of taxpayers' money without warning, without consultation, and when she fails to address the most serious environmental policy proposals contained in the government's Speech from the Throne, including the plan to price carbon.
The minister also failed to address any of the work being undertaken with our North American counterparts. I have applauded the minister for making co-operation with our American and Mexican friends a priority as we seek to align our climate change policies with those of our North American partners. This was also the policy of the previous government, recognizing that Canada's place and competitiveness within the North American production platform can only be maintained if our climate initiatives are aligned with these partners.
Could the minister not have used this opportunity to share with us the progress being made on joint regulatory initiatives? Were those initiatives not discussed at COP21 in Paris when the Prime Minister wined and dined almost 400 Canadian delegates on the taxpayers' dime?
Were these joint North American initiatives not discussed at Davos, where the Prime Minister was hobnobbing with the International jet set? While the Prime Minister used his time in Davos to cheekily promote Canadian resourcefulness, he showed utter contempt for our resource sector by glibly disparaging and dismissing the critical role that oil, gas, and mining play in supporting the Canadian way of life.
Canada is, as the minister stated, blessed with great minds and tremendous motivation. However, let us not forget that it is natural resources that pay for our education, our health, and our high standard of living. Canada must engage in the global economy, we all understand that, ever finding new ways to assure our long-term prosperity. Yes, we must always diversify and promote our knowledge advantage, as well as the Canada brand, but we must never, ever trade our birthright, our competitive advantage in the resource sector, for misguided and uninformed sound bites.
I want to remind the minister that transparency and accountability require more than just vague promises of consultations. They require clear understanding of the impact that carbon pricing policies have on consumers, small and medium-sized businesses, and on hard-working Canadian families. They require a clear understanding that Canadians expect their government to invest first here in Canada before dishing out taxpayers' money abroad.
Transparency and accountability require a clear plan for Canadians to review before that plan is implemented. Sadly, we have yet to see the plan and sadly, we have heard nothing new in the minister's comments today.
We are prepared to work with the government to find that balance between our economy and protecting our environment for future generations. That offer still stands.
International Trade June 15th, 2015
Mr. Speaker, I do not accept the premise of that question. No government has done more to advance Canada's trade interests than this Conservative government. That is why we have concluded free trade agreements with 38 different countries around the world, and we have also concluded 29 investment protection agreements.
Had the member actually reviewed the statistics, she would have found that non-energy exports actually went up 6.2% over the previous year. Last year was the first time that Canadian exports were over $1 trillion. We are very proud of that accomplishment.
International Trade June 10th, 2015
Mr. Speaker, the only doublespeak is from the NDP. Our government will continue to promote Canadian trade interests across all sectors of our economy, including supply management. That has never prevented us from successfully concluding trade agreements with countries like the United States, with the European Union, with South Korea.
We make no apologies for ensuring that any deal reached must be in Canada's best interests. That is the standard we have set and we will only sign a trade agreement if it significantly benefits Canadian workers and families.
International Trade June 10th, 2015
Mr. Speaker, no one has done more for Ukraine than this Conservative government.
The Prime Minister has visited Ukraine on a number of occasions. We have hosted President Poroshenko here in the House. I have been to Ukraine on two occasions to see for myself the situation on the ground.
It is this government that began free trade negotiations with the Ukrainian government. We continue to pursue those negotiations. Our negotiators are at the table, hoping to complete negotiations in the short term so Ukrainians can benefit from more open markets.
In the meantime, we are also stepping in, supporting democracy, transparency and governance within that country.
International Trade June 8th, 2015
Mr. Speaker, no government has done more to advance Canada's trade interests than this Conservative government. Our government has concluded free trade agreements with 38 different countries, with many more to come.
Had the member actually reviewed the statistics she quoted, she would have found that, if we factor out the decline in energy prices, our exports are actually up 6.2%, year over year. On our manufacturing related statistics, our sectors have posted double-digit export gains.
We will take no lessons from the NDP when it comes to trade.
International Trade June 3rd, 2015
Mr. Speaker, I do not accept the premise of that question. I have made it very clear in the House many times that our government will continue to promote and defend the interests of our supply managed farmers.
There is no government that has done more for Canadian farmers than this Conservative government. Our government understands that expanded trade will be a key driver of economic growth for Canada. That is why we are participating in the TPP negotiations. We are opening up a market of 800 million consumers, a market that is worth somewhere in the order of $29 trillion a year.
On this side of the House, we understand what is important for Canadians, and that is economic growth and long-term prosperity.
International Trade June 3rd, 2015
Mr. Speaker, our government will continue to promote Canada's trade interests across all sectors of our economy, across every region of our country, including supply management. That has never prevented us from successfully completing trade agreements with countries like the United States, the European Union and South Korea.
We make no apologies for ensuring that any deal reached must be in Canada's best interests. As always, we will only sign a trade agreement that is in the best interests of Canadians.
International Trade June 1st, 2015
Mr. Speaker, I can assure the member that our government remains committed to working out the details of an MPR fund with the Government of Newfoundland and Labrador. The fund was always intended to compensate hard-working Newfoundlanders and Labradorians for actual losses arising out of the removal of MPRs. It makes sense. It was never intended to be a blank cheque that could be used to disadvantage the maritime provinces. Why will the member not stand up for the Atlantic provinces?
Federal officials remain open to receiving proposals from their provincial counterparts on how to implement the MPR fund. As yet, we have not received such a proposal.