House of Commons photo

Crucial Fact

  • His favourite word was justice.

Last in Parliament September 2008, as Conservative MP for Calgary Northeast (Alberta)

Won his last election, in 2006, with 65% of the vote.

Statements in the House

Recall Act November 1st, 1994

Mr. Speaker, I was not here for the vote. However, had I been here I would have cast my vote in favour of the motion.

Immigration November 1st, 1994

Listen to the minister's math on page 8. In 1995 accompanying family and sponsored families together are expected to make up about 80 per cent of total immigration from the broader vision immigration and citizenship outline. On page 9, economic immigrants, skilled workers and business immigrants will make up 43 per cent of the immigrant component for 1995. This percentage remains unchanged from 1994. If you add up family and independent immigration you get a whopping total of 123 per cent. That is Liberal math. Nothing changes. The numbers are fudged. No action is being taken. Today's announcement is pure smoke and mirrors.

This government thinks the Canadian people can be swayed into believing that non-action is action, that no real change in numbers means a cut, that tough talk equals tough action in the minds of the voters. Well I have news for government members. The people will not buy it.

Today's announcement says that enforcement will be beefed up and that removals will be clarified when in fact the minister has created a permanent amnesty for failed refugee claimants. That is pretty convenient. Those people who have tied up and backlogged the system with taxpayer funded appeals, with legal manipulation for three years get an automatic amnesty.

This government punishes those applicants for immigration who make a real contribution to this country, those who play by the rules, who fill out the right forms, who wait in queues that last for years in some cases. At the same time the government rewards those applicants who come in illegally, who work the system with legal aid lawyers and who can evade removal for three years. That is disgraceful.

Let us look at the numbers again. The 1994 plan calls for 30,700 skilled workers. The 1995 plan calls for 24,000 to 26,000 skilled workers. The 1994 plan calls for 6,000 business class immigrants. The 1995 plan calls for 4,000 to 5,000 business class immigrants. The total economic class was 97,700 in 1994. This year it is 71,000 to 80,000.

In other words we are looking at substantial cuts to those immigrants who can make an immediate and substantial contribution to the economy. There is no change to the level of those immigrants whose contribution is unknown and there is an amnesty for those immigrants who jump queue and abuse the system.

Again the independent and economic classes are dropping substantially and do you know why? Because the same woolly headed policies that are guiding the immigration department are also guiding the finance department, the human resources department, and on and on.

This Liberal government has created an economic climate of high taxes, huge debt and low return on investments. It is discouraging those immigrants who could contribute the most to the economy of the country. In fact in Calgary there are something like 400 business class immigrants who have not invested their money because they do not see any advantage in doing so. Canada is no longer an attractive place for investors and business people. It is however the most attractive destination in the world for queue jumpers and failed refugee claimants.

The immigration plan speaks of a broader vision, a 10-year framework. It is a broader vision of the same old thing, a new framework for the same old policies. It has cost the immigrant program its legitimacy. It has discouraged independent immigrants. It has made the Canadian people fundamentally question the role of immigration to Canada. That is a shame.

Immigration can and should work for the country. Immigration should be about nation building. That term has been used by the government time and time again but it really rings hollow when said from that side. It should be about enriching Canada. It should be about benefiting immigrants and Canadians alike.

The plan is about deceit, number fudging and politicking. The government has let down immigrants and Canadians alike.

Immigration November 1st, 1994

Mr. Speaker, I am dumbfounded and Canadians should be outraged over what has just been revealed here by the minister.

Almost a year ago this minister initiated a $1 million consultation during which thousands of well meaning patriotic Canadians put time, talent and energy to work proposing changes to immigration. During the last several months this minister has engaged in a series of well planned media leaks, floating trial balloons, raising expectations, talking a tough line

and trying to out reform the Reform Party in policy, or at least that is the impression he has left.

In the last week the minister admitted to a cost to the taxpayer of at least $700 million in family sponsorship breakdowns. He promised he would do something about it. This morning we found out that nothing has changed, nothing has been done. The consultations were a fraud. There has been a lot of talk, talk, talk, study, study, study, and it looks like the studying will continue.

For anyone who wants a lesson in old style politics, we are learning it right now. It is a lesson in trying to manipulate the media, a lesson in trying to manipulate the public, a lesson in trying to please everyone by not offending anyone. It is a lesson in government inaction.

One need look no further than this government and its minister of immigration to get a good picture of what has happened. Let me outline with no fancy language or rhetoric what the minister is going to do this year.

The percentage of economic immigrants with their families was 43 per cent. In 1995 that number will still be 43 per cent. The percentage in the family reunification class of those already in Canada was 51 per cent. This year it will still be 51 per cent. Other immigrants were 6 per cent last year. This year, surprise, surprise, it is 6 per cent. The total number of immigrants accepted this year is 230,000. The total number expected next year is up to 215,000, a change of only 6 per cent.

That is not a cut. It is nothing more than an expectation of lower application levels. The levels are so high that our sources in immigration tell us there are not enough applications to fill the slots. This minister wants to take credit for lower numbers and those lower numbers have nothing whatsoever to do with government action.

A bond for sponsors will be studied but no immediate action taken. During the year or so this government plans to study this issue, Canadians will have to fork out at least $700 million more in sponsorship breakdowns. Where is the enforcement of what is happening here already to save those taxpayers dollars?

Changes to refugee policy, there are virtually none, except an ongoing amnesty that rewards those who can tie up the system for three years. There are no changes to control and enforcement, except for the defective Bill C-44 which is already pending in the House.

This minister said changes would be made that would make immigration work to the benefit of society. He said that more of an emphasis would be placed on independent immigrants. However this plan for the next year says that family reunification is still the highest priority of the government and that the ultimate goal of immigration levels equal to 1 per cent of the population still stands. We are talking about numbers in the vicinity of 300,000.

Refugees October 31st, 1994

Mr. Speaker, abuse of Canada's immigration system goes on unchecked by the government. In fact Ottawa is to blame for much of the abuse.

On September 9 a Fijian visitor with relatives in Vancouver armed with a refugee lawyer claimed refugee status in Canada. Officials did not know, however, that he needed kidney treatment that he could not get in Fiji.

He checked into St. Paul's hospital in Vancouver. Rather than being placed on a waiting list or being sent home for treatment, federal officials ordered the hospital to put the man at the top of the list for dialysis, despite the fact that six terminally ill Canadians were bumped from the list.

This is an outrage. The refugee system seems to work best for those who want to abuse it. In this case it could cost Canadian lives. I demand that the minister immediately intervene, tell his officials to reverse their decision, put the lives of Canadians first, and prevent those with terminal illnesses from coming to the country and claiming refugee status just to get medical treatment.

Immigration Act October 31st, 1994

Mr. Speaker, I urge all members of the House to support this motion. It is time that we sent a strong, non-partisan, non-political message to the immigration minister and to the government. It is time to put Canadians first. It is time to enforce the preamble to the Immigration Act that charges us with responsibility for the protection and safety of Canadians.

HIV-AIDS has been politicized. It has become a partisan issue and that is a crying shame. We tend to forget that the politics of this disease has prevented Canada from taking action to eliminate it. It has cost us untold numbers of lives.

This motion does nothing more than extend Canada's regulations regarding the entry of people with serious transmittable diseases to the most serious transmittable disease of all. That is not intolerance. That is not special interest pandering. It is not regressive. It is common sense.

If we in the House have a duty to exercise leadership in the interests of doing right for Canadians we have a duty to do more than just pander to our respective blocks of voters. We have a duty to do more than gauge the winds of special interest opinion.

This is what my colleague, the minister of immigration, has done for the past year. It has lead to a year of non-action, a year in which the legitimacy of our immigration program has been severely undermined. For immigration to continue in Canada it must have the support of the Canadian people. It must command respect. In order for it to command respect in the eyes of the public, the program must be seen to be protecting and furthering the needs and interests of Canadians.

Protecting HIV-AIDS, giving it special status simply because of its politics is the very opposite to protecting the needs of Canadians. It must stop.

The House should be in the business of creating and maintaining an immigration program that works for everyone. We can do nothing less.

Immigration Act October 31st, 1994

Mr. Speaker, I rise on a point of order on the right of reply. I seek the unanimous consent of the House for a two-minute conclusion to this debate.

Crtc October 27th, 1994

Mr. Speaker, in 1978 John Munro called a judge on behalf of a man being tried for an offence. He was forced to resign from the cabinet because this was in violation of ministerial rules of conduct established by Prime Minister Trudeau at the time.

Will the present Prime Minister uphold the ethical standards that were applied by Prime Minister Trudeau and ask the Minister of Canadian Heritage for his resignation?

Crtc October 27th, 1994

Mr. Speaker, there are still a lot of unanswered questions relating to the Daniilidis application.

The Minister of Canadian Heritage took six months to clarify his intervention to Mr. Daniilidis' application. When did the Prime Minister learn of the intervention by the Minister of Canadian Heritage?

Petitions October 26th, 1994

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to present several petitions bearing the names of over 5,700 petitioners from Ontario and across Canada.

The petitioners humbly pray and call on Parliament to reduce immigration to the previous level of one-half of 1 per cent of the population or about 150,000 persons per year, with the basic intake of not less than 50 per cent of the total composed of carefully selected skilled workers required by the Canadian economy, and that our refugee acceptance rate be brought in line with the average asylum destination countries.

These petitions were initiated by the Immigration Association of Canada. I support their efforts to address concerns over immigration policy.

Immigration October 25th, 1994

Mr. Speaker, for a year now this minister has been telling Canadians that high immigration levels are okay, even when unemployment is high. We have said there is a level at which immigration hurts the economy and the finance department agrees with us.

Will the minister wake up to the facts, show some political will and cut the numbers? Will he do what is right for Canadians and not just for the immigration industry?