House of Commons photo

Crucial Fact

  • His favourite word was world.

Last in Parliament March 2008, as Liberal MP for Toronto Centre (Ontario)

Won his last election, in 2006, with 52% of the vote.

Statements in the House

Citizenship and Immigration March 30th, 2004

Mr. Speaker, a passport is an extremely important document for our citizens and our country. As every member in the House knows, many members opposite have been complaining to me about the length of time the passport office takes to issue new passports.

The problems, to which the Auditor General quite rightly adverted, have been addressed by the passport office. Immediate communications are made with the police. All passports that are lost or stolen are immediately deactivated for travel. We have addressed these issues.

We appreciate the Auditor General's comments. We will continue to strive to ensure that our passport is the most secure and best document in the world.

Foreign Affairs March 25th, 2004

Mr. Speaker, we have received representations in respect of the visit of the Dalai Lama. We have a great deal of respect for His Holiness as a Nobel Prize winner and as someone who is coming to our country and will be treated with a great deal of respect.

In terms of whether or not we would have official government discussions with him, that is another matter, but that does not mean in any way that we in the House and everyone on this side of the House in particular do not regard the Dalai Lama with the highest of respect and the veneration he is due.

Foreign Affairs March 23rd, 2004

It is quite the contrary, Mr. Speaker. The right hon. Prime Minister and myself met with Javier Solana, the representative of Europe and the European representatives, here last week. We discussed this very important issue. Canada remains committed to bringing peace in the Balkans. We have made a tremendous contribution there in terms of our troops and our stability forces in that region.

The Europeans are presently under NATO command responsible for security in that region. However, we will continue to work with them and other countries to bring peace in the Balkans and to ensure that human rights are respected there.

We are active on this. The Prime Minister remains engaged, and we will continue to be active.

Agriculture March 23rd, 2004

Mr. Speaker, I hope the hon. member, by her question, did not mean to tarnish the reputation of an exceedingly effective diplomat who is presently serving this country in Washington. We have an exemplary public service. We have an exemplary diplomatic corps. We have a first class representative in Washington.

We have an opportunity to change diplomats when the proper rotation comes up. The Prime Minister, who is in constant consultation, has ensured that we have the highest quality of representation everywhere in the world, but particularly in Washington.

Foreign Affairs March 23rd, 2004

Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister has just made himself very clear. There is no contradiction whatsoever in what we each said. We both said the same thing, condemning the killing on the one hand, while on the other hand saying that Israel has the right to defend itself. What is more, we feel that such acts do not contribute to peace.

Canada is always seeking to further peace. That is what we all want for that region. We therefore call upon all parties to stay calm and to focus again on a peace plan for both parties.

Question No. 23 March 22nd, 2004

Canada has a long history of fishing treaties with the United States, dating back to Empire Treaties that were negotiated on Canada's behalf by Great Britain. These include agreements such as the 1912 agreement between the United Kingdom and the United States respecting the North Atlantic fisheries, which prescribed the method of promulgating fisheries regulations and the delimitation of certain bays on Canada's east coast.

Aside from historic treaties, Canada currently has seven bilateral fishing treaties with the United States, which are as follows:

Agreement between the Government of Canada and the Government of the United States of America on Pacific hake/whiting: This recently negotiated agreement was signed by Canada and the United States on November 21, 2003 , in Seattle, Washington, but is not yet in force. It prescribes the formation of scientific and management committees for the purpose of determining the total allowable catch of Pacific hake/whiting and the respective harvest quotas for Canada and the United States.

Agreement between the Government of Canada and Government of the United States of America on fisheries enforcement: This treaty was signed on September 26, 1990, in Ottawa, Canada and entered into force on December 16, 1991. It aims to improve the enforcement of fisheries laws and regulations within both countries' respective internal waters, territorial seas and 200-mile zone.

Treaty between the Government of Canada and Government of the United States of America concerning Pacific salmon: The Pacific salmon treaty was signed in Ottawa, Canada, on January 28, 1985, and came into force on March 18, 1985. The treaty obliges Canada and the United States to conduct fisheries so as to provide for optimum production and equitable of salmon stocks and establishes the Pacific salmon commission, a body that directs the joint managment of transboundary pacific salmon stocks and works for the protection and management of pacific salmon runs. The treaty also includes four annexes, creating fishery panel committees and fishery regimes to regulate fisheries activities in the regions specified by the treaty, and a memorandum of understanding which provides for each country to receive benefits equivalent to the production of salmon originating in its waters. Also, an agreement respecting Yukon River salmon was reached in 2002 and incorporated as chapter 8 of the Pacific salmon agreement.

Treaty between the Government of Canada and Government of the United States of America on Pacific coast albacore tuna vessels and port privileges: This Treaty was signed in Washington, D.C., U.S.A. on May 26, 1981, and came into force on July 29, 1981. It was amended in 1997. The treaty allows each party to engage in fishing for albacore tuna in waters under the jurisdiction of the other party that are seaward of the territorial seas, and to land, transship or sell their catches in specific ports of the other party. An amendment to this treaty was recently negotiated, but is not yet in force, which provides for annual consultation between the parties on albacore tuna stocks and limitations on the amount of fishing by each party's vessels in the waters of the other party.

Convention on Great Lakes fisheries between Canada and the United States of America: This convention was signed on September 10, 1954 in Washington, D.C., U.S.A. and entered into force on October 11, 1955. The convention addresses the decline in productivity of some of the Great Lakes fisheries and seeks to prevent further serious damage to some of these fisheries caused by the parasitic sea lamprey. The convention provides for the establishment of the Great Lakes fishery commission to co-ordinate and implement effective research, conservation and management programs.

Convention between Canada and the United States of America for the preservation of the halibut fishery of the northern Pacific Ocean and Bering Sea: This treaty was signed on March 2, 1953, in Ottawa, Canada, and entered into force on October 28, 1953. The treaty continued the international Pacific halibut commission (the origin of which was the 1923 convention for the preservation of the halibut fisheries of the northern Pacific Ocean), a body that conducts stock assessments of, and performs biological research on, Pacific halibut.

Exchange of notes (March 4 and April 30, 1948) between Canada and the United States of America regarding sanitary practices in the shellfish industries and related matters: This agreement was made by an exchange of notes on March 4, 1948, and April 30, 1948, and came into force on April 30, 1948. It aims to improve sanitary practices in the shellfish industries of Canada and the United States and to facilitate the exchange of information with reference to endorsement of shellfish certifications.

Foreign Affairs March 22nd, 2004

Mr. Speaker, we recognize entirely the right of Israel to take steps to protect itself and its citizens against acts of terrorism. But we have condemned the death of Sheikh Yassin because, in our view, this is a matter that is contrary to international legal obligations on behalf of the state of Israel and will contribute to instability in the area and will make peace, which we all work for so hard, more difficult to achieve.

We call upon all parties to return to the road map. We call upon a return to a concept of peace in the area. We ask for restraint on behalf of all parties in this difficult time.

World Water Day March 22nd, 2004

Mr. Speaker, we examine all proposals from the Commission on Human Rights. It is very important to know what social and economic rights people have.

But, as for everyone having a right to water, we must acknowledge that we are neighbours with a country that has its own ideas about access to water. It is Canada's role to examine this very important concept of international law in conjunction with other states. We must work together with the international community to ensure this has an actual impact and does not remain mere rhetoric, as our colleague would have it.

Taiwan March 12th, 2004

Mr. Speaker, my answer is the same as to the previous question. The member knows perfectly well that the organization's bylaws are what will pose a problem. The entire international community must approve in order to change an international organization's bylaws.

Instead, in Canada—because we intervened on behalf of Taiwan—we are working with the Government of Taiwan to ensure it has all the information it needs to respond to the health crisis affecting its citizens. That is what we are doing.

There is a practical solution to this problem, not the ideological solution the opposition member would have us adopt.

Foreign Affairs March 12th, 2004

Mr. Speaker, sometimes the expressed will of politicians runs up against some hard facts which they cannot change. This happens to be one of them.

In this case we cannot change the WHO by ourselves. To suggest that we are anti-Taiwan is completely erroneous. The fact of the matter is the House, the members of the House, all of us wish to work with the Taiwanese government and the Taiwanese people to ensure that they get the best health organization help they can.

We are doing that, and we are working through the international channels that we can. We support their ability and their wishes to have good health organization information. We will continue to do that.