Crucial Fact

  • Her favourite word was burlington.

Last in Parliament November 2005, as Liberal MP for Burlington (Ontario)

Lost her last election, in 2008, with 33% of the vote.

Statements in the House

Division No. 112 March 25th, 1998

I rise, on a point of order, Mr. Speaker. I know sometimes we all have other duties but I think you will notice that the member for Fundy—Royal actually left his chair and the member for St. John's West left the Chamber completely during that vote. I am not sure that either of their votes should count.

Public Gallery March 18th, 1998

Mr. Speaker, children from across Canada are in our House today. They are visiting while on their March break. As members of Parliament we are indeed lucky to welcome them today and to have among those youngsters a special group, the Little Sisters and Little Brothers of Ottawa-Carleton.

My congratulations and thanks to all those people in our communities who work directly with these young Canadians, the future of our nation. Big Brothers, Big Sisters provides mentoring, friendship and a much needed break. As organizations they welcome Canadians from coast to coast to coast to take up the challenge and become a volunteer. Judging from the fine group of little sisters and little brothers we met, the rewards are infinite.

I thank the students who join us today. They remind us of our tremendous opportunity as a nation and of our responsibility to our youngsters. Have fun.

The Budget February 26th, 1998

Mr. Speaker, the member opposite has highlighted a very responsible move on behalf of this government. We have moved to reduce EI premiums in each of the years that we have been office rather than what the previous government did. In a time of great difficulty and a time of downturn in the economy, it increased the premiums and further exasperated the difficulties for finding employment.

He also opens up another opportunity. We built a nest egg and that is important for what is a cyclical turn in the economy. We have also reduced premiums for all workers and that is very important.

Third, in this budget we provide an EI holiday to all those who hire young Canadians between 18 and 24. That perhaps is one of the most interesting and creative ways to deliver job opportunities to young people from coast to coast. It is as important to the kids in Montreal and in the member's riding as it is to the kids in Burlington and the kids in Kamloops. It gives them an opportunity. It says to employers if they fulfill their side of the bargain in creating this opportunity and we will fulfill something for them, we will give them a bit of a break. That is a very important initiative. I am glad the member is supportive of those reduced premiums for our young Canadians.

The Budget February 26th, 1998

Mr. Speaker, in my speech I was reflecting what we heard in the presentations that were made to us as we travelled across the country and as we sat here in Ottawa. In fact there was not broad support for across the board tax cuts.

However, in terms of our commitments and the delivery we have made in the budget, the hon. member should present the facts as they are. Sixty per cent of what we have done in the budget will reduce taxes and the debt. That is more than our commitment to the public on that issue.

The issue of bracket creep is one we have to address seriously. I hope we can do it in the next budget. It is something that has concerned me for quite a while. It is something I hope we will be able to do as we get the economy in better shape. I hope the member for Calgary Southeast will support us in that initiative.

The Budget February 26th, 1998

Mr. Speaker, I am honoured to be part of this debate on the 1998 federal budget and to share my perspective on how this budget will benefit Canadians today and tomorrow.

I am particularly proud to be part of this debate as the vice-chair of the House of Commons Standing Committee on Finance. This year we completed the most extensive public consultation ever. My colleagues did an excellent job and made the many hours of deliberation pass quickly. Their support to me personally, especially on the road as we met Canadians in Regina, Winnipeg, Montreal, Fredericton and Charlottetown made chairing easy. To those Canadians who shared their ideas, their hopes and dreams and the benefit of their experience along the way and here in Ottawa, thank you.

During Burlington's prebudget meeting, the variety of opinions and suggestions was truly impressive, every idea born of experience and every suggestion a good one in its own right.

Balancing all of these special interests is not an easy task. In fact it is such a difficult task that some opposition members preferred not to consider special interests in their policy making. Our success is built on our commitment to ensuring that our policy decisions reflect the core values Canadians hold from coast to coast coast.

The 1998 budget reflects the hopes and dreams of Canadians of all ages. The Minister of Finance presented Canadians with a balanced budget, a focused plan which prepares and propels us into the 21st century. It is a Liberal balanced approach.

This budget signifies a turning point for all Canadians. Over the past four years our budgets have been about how to reduce our deficit and get our country back on track without kicking the legs out from the economy. They have been about making strategic small steps in areas we knew were desperate for help knowing that the dismal set of books left to us by previous governments limited our choices.

Our challenge then was about how to deliver very necessary services to Canadians under very restrictive circumstances. This budget is about pursuing those goals as individuals and as a nation. It builds on those baby steps and starts us walking freely and upright, proud of our accomplishments as a nation in working hard and getting our financial circumstances back in order.

This budget is about helping Canadians open doors. The Canadian opportunities strategy is a carefully considered well crafted initiative. It gives Canadians in every region something to look forward to, to count on, to believe in and to invest in. It builds on our commitment to getting Canadians back to work, to being financial responsible and to preparing our children for healthy productive lives. While time will not permit me to expand on all seven steps in the strategy, I will highlight a few.

The Canadian millennium scholarship foundation says to bright young Canadians they do have a chance for post-secondary education in spite of their families' limited circumstances if they work hard and produce results in high school. It ensures our next generation has a fighting chance.

The strategy includes grants of up to $3,000 to students with children allowing parents to take advantage of post-secondary education they only dreamed of in the past.

The strategy allows those who wish to increase their employability to do so by allowing them to withdraw tax free from their RRSP to enrol in full time education and training. This is particularly helpful to those on whom the economy has forced a second career at age 45 or 50.

In partnership with families the Canadian education savings grant provides added reasons to put a few dollars away for a child, a niece or a grandson, for their future post-secondary education. It builds on our previous initiative to remove some of the risk of that investment.

These are concrete examples of how much this government believes in its greatest resource, the Canadian public. Equal to this accomplishment and a critical commitment to Canadians was our increase of some $400 million over the next four years to the granting councils.

We have made a commitment to Canadian researchers, university professors and post-secondary students. This measure reflects the government's commitment to ensuring Canada remains competitive in the next millennium. It says to our brightest and our best: Stay here in Canada. Make your discoveries here. Invent your inventions. As partners we recognize your work enhances our economy and international competitiveness.

Finally, there is the important issue of taxation. While it should be every government's dream to reduce taxation to its citizens, governments must not do so irresponsibly. That is why Canadians did not ask for broad tax cuts. It is why they told us in city after city to reinvest in their society, provide some relief for the sacrifices they have made over the past few years and pay down the debt. Canadians are not foolhardy, even if some of their elected officials in opposition pretend that they would be.

This budget does cut taxes in a strategic way. It supports families by increasing the child care expense deduction to more accurately reflect the true cost of child care allowing young families more flexibility in their budgets.

This budget removes the 3% surtax for those who need the biggest breaks. It is responsible and fair.

This budget is consistent with our last budget and the one before that. It delivers on our strategy. It reflects the core values Canadians have. It reflects their priorities because it was created in consultation with them. It is a budget that makes strategic investments in Canadians. It delivers on the hopes of Canadians and their commitment to work hard to accomplish their dreams.

Gordon Tapp February 18th, 1998

Mr. Speaker, on behalf of Burlington residents it is my pleasure to rise today to congratulate Order of Canada recipient Gordon Tapp.

For more than five decades Mr. Tapp has entertained us as a comedian, musician and scriptwriter on radio, television and on the stage. His unique down-home charm has tickled the funny bones of people of all ages.

Mr. Tapp gives generously of his time and talent by raising funds for volunteer organizations such as the Muscular Dystrophy Association, the Easter Seal Society and local Burlington organizations.

He has thrilled world leaders and brought cheer to our troops overseas.

Colleagues, please join me in congratulating Gordie Tapp. A great Canadian and a fine citizen, he brings honour to our community and our country.

National Revenue February 11th, 1998

Mr. Speaker, will the Minister of National Revenue please tell us what he has learned as he consulted Canadians on creating the Canada customs and revenue agency?

Committees Of The House December 11th, 1997

Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the hon. member's comments.

There was definitely a call for increased spending on research. Canada needs to do more to focus on that innovative economy. We heard it in Montreal, in Toronto and all across the country. I firmly believe in that. Many people in my riding are dependent on that research. They are fulfilling the research requirements of the nation. They are encouraging the country to do more.

We have had to make some tough decisions over the last few years, but we have still managed to have the best country for all Canadians to live in. We will—

Committees Of The House December 11th, 1997

Mr. Speaker, I am glad the member clarified that point. Earlier he implied there was an increase in unemployment instead of a decrease. He needs to recognize that the economy has grown, that there are more Canadians in the workplace as we have more generations graduating from university and more citizens.

The numbers speak for themselves. Over one million jobs have been created in this country and there has been a decrease in the overall unemployment rate across the board for Canadians. In Burlington the unemployment rate is somewhere around 7% or better. There are opportunities at home and abroad. Burlington residents and many residents across Canada feel a willingness and optimism in going after new markets and new opportunities. This is demonstrated by the prime minister's terrific Team Canada missions and our focus on increased opportunity in the very competitive international market. These missions have demonstrated that Canadians can compete and will continue to do that.

I encourage the member to look at those numbers again and to keep that math straight.

Committees Of The House December 11th, 1997

Mr. Speaker, I am not sure I understood the member's question. Perhaps it was my interpretation of the math. I think he suggested that 1.5 million were unemployed in 1993 and that 1.3 million are unemployed now. Then he suggested that was an increase. Could he clarify that point.