House of Commons photo

Track Ted

Your Say


Crucial Fact

  • His favourite word is colleague.

Liberal MP for Kingston and the Islands (Ontario)

Won his last election, in 2011, with 39.30% of the vote.

Statements in the House

Economic Action Plan 2014 Act, No. 2 October 30th, 2014

Mr. Speaker, I have a question about the first item that my hon. colleague addressed, which is the children's fitness tax credit.

The question is about whether the changes to the tax credit measure are really about children's fitness. The way to decide that is to ask the government, I believe, if it has any intention of measuring what the change in children's fitness or fitness activity is as a result of the tax credit.

Economic Action Plan 2014 Act, No. 2 October 30th, 2014

Mr. Speaker, I would like to follow on the last question, because it seems to me that the current Conservative government has rejected what would be a very good improvement, and that is to replace its plan for EI tax credits with a plan that would actually give an incentive to businesses to create jobs.

It is one thing to give businesses money, which they may or may not invest. It is another thing to say that, if they create a new job, they will get a credit. They would get this incentive.

Economic choices are made at the margins. This is basic economics. I really would like the member to answer the question that was previously posed, and also to tell the Canadian people why we do not give businesses an incentive to create new jobs instead of just a simple transfer of cash.

Economic Action Plan 2014 Act, No. 2 October 30th, 2014

Mr. Speaker, I have a question about a specific detail in the bill. The previous act, the Canadian Polar Commission Act, allowed the commission to initiate activities. The proposed Canadian high Arctic research act does not say anything about initiating activities. Therefore, it seems to me that, with this new act, the government would be taking away some of the autonomy that used to be present.

It seems the government is trying to have more control over what researchers do, take away control and centralize it in the Prime Minister's Office and the minister's office. To me, it is just another example of how controlling the government is. I am wondering why the government is afraid of just keeping the same language as before and allowing researchers in the north to have some autonomy.

Business of Supply October 21st, 2014

Mr. Speaker, I would like to follow up on something the Prime Minister said during question period. It sounded like there was some uncertainty as to whether the government would be voting in favour or against the motion today.

Since some time has passed, I wonder if the member knows whether she will be voting for or against the motion.

Health October 21st, 2014

Mr. Speaker, Bloomberg reports that the Gates Foundation and two U.S. companies want to expand U.S. production of monoclonal antibodies to treat Ebola by using CHO cells, but we have the capacity to manufacture it in Canada as well. Our Public Health Agency of Canada developed Ebola antibodies and our National Research Council owns the CHO cell line. There are Canadian companies that could take these and manufacture a supply.

Should the government mandate that Canada have its own supply of this Ebola treatment?

Business of Supply October 9th, 2014

Mr. Speaker, I am a little surprised that the NDP motion today asks the House to reject the process and not simply let the scientists speak and make an evaluation of whether this is a sustainable project or not. I believe that this NDP motion is really short-circuiting the process, which we certainly should be trying to make as rigorous as possible.

Taking into account the government, would my hon. colleague from Halifax agree that it is a double-edged sword to be saying that the House should be pronouncing on a project which is more properly considered in a process that is rigorous and that can and should be made more rigorous? Could the government not use this motion against the idea of sustainable development?

Business of Supply October 9th, 2014

Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague from Saint-Laurent—Cartierville for laying the case out very clearly that the government has withheld crucial information. The whole idea is whether the public can accept that sustainable development can occur under the Conservative government. If the government hides crucial scientific information, how can the public ever have confidence that sustainable development will occur with this project?

Business of Supply October 9th, 2014

Mr. Speaker, as the hon. member pointed out, the way this motion was written covers up the problem. In other words, this government has not disclosed all the scientific facts known to the minister's office or to marine mammal experts.

Why does the motion not explicitly mention this problem which, to my way of thinking, is this government's main problem regarding this issue?

Military Contribution Against ISIL October 7th, 2014

Mr. Speaker, given that the Conservative government has decided to limit debate on the current motion, does the government have plans to provide briefings to opposition members of Parliament, which may include non-public information that may be required for opposition members to carry out their duties of holding the government to account?

The Environment October 2nd, 2014

Mr. Speaker, I just want to address one of the points that my hon. colleague made, which is a common argument that one hears: that Canada's emissions are only 2% of the world's emissions, so it is not that critical that Canada deal with its emissions.

On this anniversary of the beginning of the First World War, Canadians should be reminded that Canada only contributed about 2% of the combatants to the allied effort in the First World War, and that was not insignificant.

This summer, I gave a medallion to a Canadian D-Day veteran. We cannot tell that veteran that because he was only one person landing on the beach on D-Day that his effort was insignificant.

It is shameful when the government uses that argument, when it says that Canada's emissions are only 2% of the world's emissions. If Canada wants to be a leader—and I believe that Canada has a duty to be a leader in this world—we cannot make that argument.

The government has no sense of the importance of climate change, and it deserves to be kicked out of office next year.