Crucial Fact

  • Her favourite word was countries.

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

Lost her last election, in 2006, with 39% of the vote.

Statements in the House

Criminal Code May 29th, 2002

Madam Speaker, I thank the hon. member for his question which as usual is well researched and hits dead on the target.

As recently stated in the House, it is the policy of the government to ratify the United Nations convention on the law of the sea as soon as possible, bearing in mind it is the primary duty of the government and ourselves to protect Canada's fish stocks. This means an effective international fisheries regime for straddling and highly migratory fish stocks outside the 200 mile exclusive economic zone.

By way of background, I note that the UNCLOS was opened for signature in Montego Bay, Jamaica on December 10, 1982. This marked a culmination of more than 14 years of work by over 150 countries. The convention currently has 158 signatories and 138 parties. The convention entered into force on November 16, 1994, and is now binding and effective for states which are party to it.

Canada signed the United Nations convention on the law of the sea in 1982, after being one of the most active participants in the negotiations. Although the UNCLOS was one of our highest priority treaty negotiations in the 1970s, Canada initially delayed ratification in the mid-1980s due to its opposition to its seabed mining provisions.

A satisfactory resolution to the seabed mining issue was found in 1994 through an agreement amending UNCLOS. However increasing concerns about the failure of the United Nations convention on the law of the sea to address the problems of overfishing of straddling stocks prevented Canada from proceeding with ratification. Consequently, it was agreed that Canada would ratify when an effective enforcement regime for high seas fisheries was in place.

Since 1992 Canada has focused its efforts on the development and adoption of the UN agreement on straddling and highly migratory fish stocks, UNFA. This agreement fills these gaps by establishing this management regime.

UNFA entered into force last December. It is an excellent first step toward establishing the effective high seas fisheries regime for which we are looking. However UNFA is not yet in force for a number of the significant participants who are fishing off of Canada's shores. In this regard I note that the European Commission has stated its intention for the EU and its member states to ratify the UNFA by the end of this year, 2002.

Question No. 142 May 21st, 2002

Answers to the three components of the question are as follows. During the time period in question there have been a number of contacts between Canadian and Danish and Faroese fisheries officials. However, as requested, this response sets out diplomatic contacts in Denmark with Danish, Faroese and Greenlandic interlocutors.

On August 10, 2001 in preparation for the annual meeting of the Northwest Atlantic Fisheries Organization, NAFO, in September, the Canadian embassy forwarded a list of Canadian priorities on various agenda items to Danish and Faroese officials.

On January 18, 2002 Canadian embassy officials called on Danish interlocutors and the Greenlandic official that serves as head of the Danish delegation to NAFO, roughly equivalent to Canadian director general level, for an exchange of views on agenda items for the NAFO special meeting at the end of January.

On March 14, 2002 the Canadian assistant deputy minister for Europe and Canadian chargé raised Faroese activities in the NAFO regulatory area with Danish and Faroese interlocutors, approximately equivalent to Canadian assistant deputy minister level.

On March 21, 2002 the Canadian chargé contacted Danish, Faroese and Greenlandic officials, all roughly equivalent to Canadian director general level, to provide courtesy advance notice of pending closures of Canadian ports to Faroese fishing vessels. Note that as no Canadian ambassador was accredited to Denmark at this time, the chargé was the most senior official at the embassy.

On April 16, 2002 in response to public comments by Faroese fisheries authorities that Faroese fishing vessels had not been active in NAFO division 3L since January 2002, Canadian embassy officials called on Danish interlocutors at the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, roughly equivalent to Canadian director general level, to provide details on observed activities of Faroese fishing vessels in 3L since January 2002.

Question No. 141 May 21st, 2002

Answers to the three components of the question are as follows. During the time period in question there have also been contacts between Canadian and Estonian fisheries officials. However, as requested, this response sets out diplomatic contacts in Estonia.

On September 26, 2001 the Canadian embassy contacted Estonian fisheries authorities for an exchange of views on multiple agenda items for the September annual meeting of the Northwest Atlantic Fisheries Organization, NAFO. Note that the NAFO meeting was later postponed in the wake of September 11 events.

On January 15, 2002 the Canadian embassy contacted Estonian fisheries authorities to convey Canadian priorities for the NAFO special meeting scheduled for the end of January.

On March 6, 2002 Canada's ambassador to Estonia called on Estonian interlocutors in the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, equivalent to a Canadian assistant deputy minister, to present Canadian information indicating serious overfishing by Estonia of 3L shrimp and underline that Canadian port closures were likely if activities were not rectified in short order.

On March 14, 2002 Canada's ambassador to Estonia called on Estonian interlocutors in the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, equivalent to assistant deputy minister level, to receive Estonian response to the demarche of March 6. Estonians provided more detailed information on the activities of their fleets.

On April 5, 2002 the Canadian embassy received a phone call from Estonian interlocutors in the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, equivalent to Canadian assistant deputy minister level, proposing that an Estonian delegation travel to Canada to discuss Estonian 3L fishing activities.

On April 9, 2002 the Canadian embassy contacted interlocutors in the Estonian Ministry of Foreign Affairs to provide courtesy advance notice of pending announcement of Canadian port closures to Estonian fishing vessels.

Question No. 139 May 21st, 2002

(a) Yes. The department was informed by the police that the diplomat was charged with dangerous driving, operating a motor vehicle while impaired, and failure to provide a breath sample, pursuant to sections 249(1), 253 and 254 of the Criminal Code of Canada.

(b) No other people were involved in the accident and the incident did not involve injury or death.

(c) Given privacy considerations, the department does not disclose the names and position of foreign representatives involved in alleged incidents of crime. The department is however aware that in respect to this particular case, numerous reports in the media cited a particular name.

(d) The policy of zero tolerance was vigorously applied in this case, as the department did not interfere with the decision of the police to proceed with the prosecution of the diplomat and the laying of criminal charges. Once the diplomat was criminally charged, the department requested that the mission involved waive immunity in order that the matter be adjudicated in a Canadian court. The mission concerned subsequently denied such waiver. Consistent with the impaired driving policy, the mission agreed to suspend the licence of the individual. Since then, this diplomat has left Canada.

Foreign Affairs May 10th, 2002

Mr. Speaker, I think difficulties frequently arise when our sole source of information is newspapers. The result has been made very clear. As I said yesterday, there was no request. We did not offer to do so. Again I have to say that the issues raised are simply not concerning us and are really moot.

Foreign Affairs May 10th, 2002

Mr. Speaker, in effect the question is moot, because at no time was Canada requested to take in Palestinian deportees nor did we make any specific offer to do so.

We have been urging, as has been the result, a peaceful resolution. As I said yesterday, the safety of Canadians and Canadian security is our number one priority. We are pleased that a difficult situation has finally been resolved and we commend members of the EU who were major players in that regard.

Middle East May 9th, 2002

Mr. Speaker, we have received no request, nor have we made any offers about this situation. Canada has not been involved in the negotiations to bring an end to the impasse at the Church of the Nativity, though we have encouraged both sides to end the advancement of violence.

Be assured, Mr. Speaker, that we have always acted and we will continue to act in the best interests of Canadians and in Canadian security.

Committees of the House May 9th, 2002

Mr. Speaker, I have the honour to present, in both official languages, the 19th report of the Standing Committee on Foreign Affairs and International Trade entitled “Building an Effective New Round of WTO Negotiations: Key Issues for Canada”.

In accordance with its order of reference of Thursday, December 6, 2001, your committee has considered and has held hearings on the Doha development agenda of the World Trade Organization and agreed to it on Wednesday, April 17, 2002.

Women's Institute May 6th, 2002

Mr. Speaker, on Sunday, May 5 I attended the 100th anniversary of the Thornton Branch of the Women's Institute. The first branch of the Women's Institute was founded by Adelaide Hoodless in southern Ontario in 1897.

The Women's Institute is now an international organization. Its motto “For Home and Country” provides an educational forum for women, with an emphasis on civics. The Thornton Women's Institute has six women who have been members for over 50 years.

This is a time when governments and organizations throughout North America are searching for ways to get people together, to discuss means of enhancing the quality of life in their communities, to increase opportunities to bring people together for companionship and support, and to further social cohesion. This is one of the primary ways to prevent isolation and fragmentation which too often results in social breakdown.

I wish to congratulate the Thornton Women's Institute for 100 years of strength and leadership.

Armenian People May 3rd, 2002

Mr. Speaker, I thank the hon. member for sharing her views concerning the events of 1914 to 1925, during the closing years of the Ottoman empire, which claimed so many victims and had such a devastating impact on the Armenian people and other peoples in the region.

As hon. members are aware, this was a period of history when so many atrocities were committed and many people suffered. Millions were forcibly displaced, causing much suffering and many deaths.

On a number of occasions, our government has compassionately expressed its sincere sympathy for the sufferings of the Armenian people at that time. I would like to quote an excerpt from a personal message from the Prime Minister to the Canadian Armenian community on the occasion of the 80th anniversary of the Armenian tragedy of 1915.

Canada recognizes and deplores the fact that a great number of Armenians were killed during the wars which marked the end of the Ottoman empire and extends its sympathy to the Armenian Community. Following the war, numerous displaced Armenians came to Canada and their contribution, as well as that of their descendants, has greatly enriched Canadian society. It is my hope that the memories of the past will serve to remind us of the importance of tolerance and respect for the diversity of our people

I would also like to remind hon. members that this House passed a motion during the 1996 debate on the Armenian tragedy, recognizing the week of April 20 to April 27 each year as a week of remembrance of the inhumanity of people toward one another.

As hon. members are also aware, after indepth consultations, the position of the Government of Canada toward these events was set out by the hon. member for Halton on behalf of the Minister of Foreign Affairs, in a statement on June 10, 1999 before the House.

I would also remind hon. members of the response given by the Minister of Foreign Affairs in the House this past April 18, to a question by our colleague, the hon. member for Brampton Centre. The minister said the following:

As he will recall, the government and the Prime Minister on many occasions have expressed the sympathy of our government and our people for the tragedy that occurred to the Armenian people with the collapse of the Ottoman Empire.

It is very clear, from all these statements, that we share the remembrance of these painful times and attach great importance to ensuring that remembrance of this human tragedy remains in our collective memory and that future generations know of it.

Canada has always been a land of hope for the millions of immigrants who have settled here and who will continue to do so in a spirit of renewal and reconciliation. Our diversity remains one of our country's great assets. It is this diversity which helps us not only to forge economic, political and cultural ties with the rest of the world, but also to project and promote our ideals and our values, such as tolerance, respect for human rights, democracy and the rule of law.

We are all working hard to make sure that these values are reflected in the work of international organizations and in the mechanisms created in order to prevent a recurrence of the horrors of the past and to protect human rights.

We can speak with considerable credibility in international forums, such as the United Nations and OSCE, about the potential for persons of different nationalities and cultures to live together in peace and security.

In the same vein, how could we fail to mention the recent 20th anniversary of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms? This is another example of the importance we attach as a nation to the protection of human rights.

Canada has consistently supported the development of international instruments to promote and protect human rights and the rule of law. We are particularly proud of the leadership role played by Canada in promoting important international initiatives such as the Ottawa convention and the International Criminal Court.

I would also like to say a few words about the importance Canada attaches to establishing productive, indepth, positive bilateral relations with all countries in the region, including Turkey and Armenia.

A stable and prosperous region, where reconciliation has triumphed and where mutual trust reigns, will lead to positive developments which will have an impact outside the immediate borders of the countries concerned, for the benefit of all, including Canada.

In conclusion, the tragic events of 1915 remind us that today more than ever it is important to encourage tolerance and reconciliation between peoples so that past tragedies, such as the one which so devastated the Armenian community, will never recur.

I would add that we must also look to the future, for what happened in the past must not be an obstacle to reconciliation, peace and prosperity.