House of Commons photoWon his last election, in 2006, with 40% of the vote.
Energy Sector May 30th, 1996
Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Minister of Natural Resources.
The minister recently returned from a trip to Asia during which she participated in discussions on energy issues. Can the minister explain to the House how this trip will benefit the Canadian economy?
Income Tax Budget Amendment Act May 27th, 1996
Mr. Speaker, I have listened with a great deal of interest to the comments of the hon. member for St. Boniface.
He spoke at some length about family trusts. If there is a misconception in this country in terms of what is really taking place with family trusts it seems to be one of those things that seems to abound at least at election time if not at other times.
Perhaps the hon. member could assure Canadians that progress has been made, if indeed there has been progress made on this issue in ensuring that the abuse of family trusts is no longer ongoing or at least if it has been that things have been done to correct the inefficiencies in the system.
Huron County Museum May 27th, 1996
Mr. Speaker, it is with great pleasure that I rise in the House today to recognize the recent efforts and the accomplishment of the Royal Canadian Legion, Harry B. Miner, Branch 140 in Clinton, and of the Huron County Museum which is also in my riding.
Recently my colleague, the Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of National Defence, and I were in Goderich for the official opening of a new display at the Huron County Museum.
The display is a result of an arrangement made between the museum and the Legion whereby two medals, the Victoria Cross and the Croix de Guerre, awarded during the first world war to Corporal Harry B. Miner and currently owned by the Legion, will be placed on permanent public display.
I acknowledge the hard work and commitment invested in this endeavour by the members of the Clinton Legion. Their efforts have brought about the recognition that late Corporal Miner's ultimate sacrifice truly deserves. They have also taken an important step toward better educating local residents and visitors alike of the rich history of the county of Huron.
Canadian Human Rights Act May 8th, 1996
Mr. Speaker, this evening I rise to expand upon a question I put to the Minister of National Revenue on April 25. At that time I raised the question of a ways and means bill which pertained to the issue of notional taxes, the GST on used cars.
The previous day the minister had presented a ways and means bill including 100 proposals for the improvement of our GST. The GST has been a tax which has caused so much difficulty for business.
For the most part Canadians never new that what is called a notional tax was even in existence. It was not in the vocabulary of most people. The fundamental change of the notional input tax credit was one of the major changes. I felt it was important for Canadians to realize that this important change was made in the bill.
The way the GST was collected on used goods was certainly one which was of great concern to many, many people. It was an instrument of the tax system that was clearly not understood by the majority of Canadians. When the issue was raised Canadians simply did not understand it.
In the case of the auto industry, prior to the change, a person buying a new vehicle paid GST on the full retail price. With the changes announced by the minister, the GST now only applies to the trade-in difference. This is a substantial saving of tax for those who apply the trade-in value to the purchase of their new vehicle.
One element that remains unaddressed is the issue of curbside trade which continues to flourish in this country. Many curbside shops are still operating. They buy used products from private individuals and resell them. Of course, these people are not subject to the GST. We must address this. The point of my concern is that these people do not collect GST on their business transactions. In so doing, they directly compete against many storefront operations. This is an unfair advantage.
As I conclude my remarks, I would like to say that the unfair practice will only end when the province of Ontario joins with all provinces in the harmonization of our provincial and federal taxes.
I would like to ask the Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Finance if he would deal with this issue. What efforts are being made through the business community to ensure early harmonization by the province of this aforementioned tax?
Canadian Human Rights Act April 30th, 1996
Mr. Speaker, I was not in the House when that measure was brought forward this afternoon. I believe this matter is one that should have been debated at full length. I believe there undue hurriedness in the way we are dealing with this bill. I for one moment would not ever have members believe this issue is not of great concern to many people in the House.
However, there are many people across the country who perhaps feel differently than the majority of my constituents, but I do not recall ever being stopped on the street in my community, whether on the back roads or on the streets, where someone has said to me we need legislation to address the discrimination against these people. Perhaps I do not have many of these people, I do not know, but I am not seeing that in my riding.
I am also hearing this kind of thing from my urban colleagues. For some reason it seems to be coming from a small group of people, which is really the reason why I have not had to deal with this issue in the past. For me it is difficult to believe this is really a pressing issue for Canadians today.
Canadian Human Rights Act April 30th, 1996
Mr. Speaker, the accepted view of the House is that on government measures one would support the government. I cannot say what the Prime Minister may do but when that decision is made it has to be the decision of the Prime Minister.
I have told the House, as I have told the Prime Minister and others within the party, that I cannot support this bill. Had there been some amendments giving definitions to the term sexual orientation or the family perhaps we could have addressed this issue differently.
There would be no one in the House who would agree there should be discrimination based on whatever reason. For those reasons and because those amendments will not likely be forthcoming I will not be supporting this legislation.
Canadian Human Rights Act April 30th, 1996
Mr. Speaker, I thank the hon. member for his kind sentiments. The Prime Minister has sincerely attempted to find a way to allow the House to address this issue. I also believe that when the vote is called it is my hope yet at this time that we will have a free vote. I am putting out my comments this afternoon so that he may yet hear it one more time before we come to that time.
Canadian Human Rights Act April 30th, 1996
Mr. Speaker, this afternoon I have the distinct pleasure to stand before you and to
speak on a subject which has been troublesome for me, as it has been for many members in the House.
My colleague who just spoke represents an urban riding. I represent a rural riding. When we look at the demographics of those two communities we find that in part there is not a whole lot difference other than the population perhaps.
Our role as a member of Parliament is one that expects us to be accountable, responsible and to be representative for the majority view of our constituents.
It has always been my contention that in coming to this place I have never engaged in the kind of rhetorical debate we occasionally have in the House, something we must almost be ashamed of. I do not engage in that kind of debate.
I respect my hon. colleagues across the way as I respect all of those on this side of the House who at times seem to differ with and oppose me in some of the things I have supported in the past.
On this issue I felt it important to give support and perhaps even give some credence to the notion that some of us in the House, while not always supportive of the government view, hold some very strong opinions about issues. This is not because they are only my views or a particular member's views, but they are views shared by a majority of the constituents one represents.
The sexual orientation issue has been a very deeply moral issue for me and for the majority of my constituents. As a member of Parliament it is my moral obligation and my responsibility to defend and maintain certain traditional principles, values and the dignity of sacred institutions.
One of those sacred institutions which I strongly believe in has been the foundation and basis on which the country was founded and which has brought us to this point in history, the family. This is personified in the most basic form, the traditional family unit. In Parliament all of us in one way or another represent family.
For some of us that has been a very pleasant experience and for others there are memories that we would rather forget. There are experiences in each one of our families that we sometimes find very difficult to deal with.
The issue we are talking about today of homosexuality is something that is not benign to any one of us. Each one of us here probably has someone in our family who falls into that category. I am not one who believes in discrimination. I do not believe we ought to separate ourselves from people because they happen to be different from us.
I have an example in my own family. I am proud of my family. A number of years ago we adopted a little girl. She was Jamaican. She did not have the same colour skin as I have, but she was our daughter for a short time until she was tragically killed in an accident. I can appreciate those among us who represent a different culture and background, and we have among us on all sides of the House various people who represent those kinds of people.
I am bothered by the preamble of Bill C-33. It raises some questions. If this were properly addressed it could allay some of the fears some of us have on this bill. It simply speaks of family and the interpretation of that. Perhaps your view of family is different from mine and mine might be different from someone else's, but I believe it is important that there is an interpretation given of that. I believe the best way for us to interpret family is to say that the family is represented by a mother and a father, with children in the home. That is important.
The question has been brought to the forefront by Mr. Justice Lamer who, in speaking for the majority of the Supreme Court of Canada, stated that if the Canadian Human Rights Act included sexual orientation as a prohibited ground of discrimination he might well conclude that family status includes homosexual couples. The preamble is very vague in its definition of family. That is a concern of mine.
The traditional Canadian family is steeped in principles and values which are universal. They are at the root of every legally recognized traditional nuclear family unit. These families are the true pioneers of Canada and what is distinctly Canadian.
Canadians are concerned about what this amendment will mean to the traditional family unit and the definition of marriage and spouse. Another extremely sensitive area is the adoption of children by homosexual couples.
I am a Canadian. I am also a Liberal. I am proud to have raised a daughter and two sons who have rewarded their mother and father with three beautiful grandchildren. I hold family in high regard.
I believe the courts in interpreting legislation have demonstrated a willingness to read sexual orientation into it. That interpretation concerns Canadians.
All Canadians enjoy the same legal protection and basic human rights under existing laws. All Canadians, regardless of their background or preference, are concerned this amendment will alter existing laws to ensure full spousal rights for homosexual couples, including same sex marriage, pensions, health insurance, inheritance rights, tax privileges and immigration sponsorship. These concerns must be addressed specifically.
Each member has an obligation to listen to Canadians, to read the correspondence we receive in our offices, to communicate with our constituents, to address their concerns, to speak for them and to allow them to be heard in the House. Each member of Parliament is ultimately responsible and accountable to his or her constituents
and is a product of the constituents' evaluation of their performance, based on the position each of us takes on very sensitive issues.
The diversity of representation in the House of Commons through geography, culture, philosophy and tradition is truly characteristic of the Canadian demographic. We must provide leadership, even though we sometimes differ on issues, and rise above prejudice and the special interests to defend the integrity of Parliament.
An issue of emotional and/or controversial nature can be curtailed by allowing each member the privilege of articulating their voice within the scope of Parliament, the ultimate sound board of national representation.
The government has shown leadership in tackling difficult issues. While some may say I have on occasion voted against my government on sensitive issues which I felt were issues of principle, issues about which my constituents felt very strongly, I have also supported my government in almost every initiative it has put forward. The government has shown initiative in bringing our deficit into a relative state of stability. It has shown initiative in dealing with agricultural exports and the depletion of fish stocks. All of those issues I have supported, including many of the social initiatives which have been put forward through HRD. I supported those measures.
I am here as a proud Canadian this afternoon. I am not here to argue with my colleagues or to debate sensitive issues. I believe we can find consensus. I am here this afternoon to help my government show leadership in tackling these issues.
I am asking that the Prime Minister give consideration to allowing those of us in the House who feel inclined not to support this legislation, for whatever reason, to vote freely. For me it is a very personal moral issue. It is not just an issue of sexual orientation or of sexual discrimination. I believe it is in the best interests of the party and certainly of Parliament to allow for a free vote where members can exercise their democratic rights. I ask the House be given that privilege in the vote to come.
Taxation April 25th, 1996
Mr. Speaker, this week the Minister of National Revenue introduced 100 improvements to the sales tax system.
The notional sales tax as it applies to car sales has caused much confusion, problems and a real sense that it is unfair. How will the minister's sales tax changes correct this longstanding irritant to Canadian car buyers?
Huron-Bruce April 19th, 1996
Mr. Speaker, my riding of Huron-Bruce abounds with an overwhelming amount of tourism features. Huron-Bruce follows the shores of Lake Huron, the land of sights and sounds that captivate the enthusiasm of visitors of all ages. Lakeside communities bring the Huron shoreline to life. Sauble Beach, Port Elgin, Southampton, Kincardine, Goderich and Grand Bend all feature excellent marinas, shopping, dining, festivals, theatres and playhouses, accommodation and camping. Inland communities such as Blyth offer the renowned Blyth Festival, agricultural heritage and a picturesque village nestled in the quiet stretches of endless farmland.
Huron-Bruce is a patchwork quilt of rural Canadian towns, farm landscapes, parks and Lake Huron shoreline. My riding is hometown proud and I extend to my colleagues, their families and friends an invitation to visit Huron-Bruce and experience the charm, culture and the boundless possibilities of a vacation destination.