Crucial Fact

  • His favourite word was ontario.

Last in Parliament May 2004, as Liberal MP for Haliburton—Victoria—Brock (Ontario)

Lost his last election, in 2004, with 35% of the vote.

Statements in the House

The Criminal Code May 11th, 2000

Mr. Speaker, I served some time on the Ontario parole board. I remember holding a parole hearing for a person who was an habitual drunk driver. He did not own a car and did not have a licence. Each time he was incarcerated, his time was served in the two years less a day housing at a provincial institution. The last time he was incarcerated, at which I did the parole hearing, there was no way he was getting out on parole. He served his full two years.

After he had served his time, he refused rehabilitation and refused to deal with the fact that alcohol was the leading factor for his problems. At that time I felt that he was a person in need of counselling, if not provincially then federally. I felt that he needed more time in the prison system. This was an individual who had never had a a licence, never owned a car, had seven impaired driving charges and he had no rehabilitation.

I do not know what we would do with a person like that other than to have longer incarceration periods so that public safety is taken into account.

In all good conscience, what would the member tell the families of the two people that man killed in his last accident? Would she tell them that longer incarceration was not necessary?

Petitions May 4th, 2000

Mr. Speaker, pursuant to Standing Order 36, I have the pleasure to present a petition from the people of Haliburton area asking parliament to withdraw Bill C-23 and affirm the opposite sex definition of marriage in legislation, and ensure that marriage is recognized as a unique institution.

Supply May 2nd, 2000

Mr. Speaker, actually, with respect to the name of my riding, Victoria County has been eliminated under the new restructuring and it is now called the City of the Kawartha Lakes.

I want to thank the member from Louis-Hébert for bringing forward this issue and the questions brought forward by our colleague from Kamloops, Thompson and Highland Valleys.

My question to the member deals with the allergy season and the medications people are required to take. I have allergies and I use a spray every morning. I suffer from watery eyes and usually by the end of the day I lose my voice. Allergies have many different effects on people.

Something that has always concerned me is the labelling showing the country of origin on products. A bottle of orange juice claims to be 100% orange juice, but on further study the label actually says “from concentrate”, which is really pulp. I automatically think of Florida and California. After calling the 1-800 number for consumer information which is listed on some of the products, the one thing I am not told is the country of origin. A lot of the pulp for oranges comes from South America, Malaysia, Singapore or Ceylon, places which use any kind of spray whatsoever. A chemical analysis is almost required when we pick up a bottle of orange juice to know where the pulp originated. As we know, in business, whether it is making orange juice or anything else, it is purchased where it is cheapest.

I wonder if the member would comment on that and suggest how the government could correct that particular problem, which fits into genetically modified foods, which are also going to be very tough to identify unless we have a chemical analysis.

Petitions May 2nd, 2000

Mr. Speaker, pursuant to Standing Order 36, I have the pleasure to present a petition that is a little late. The petitioners pray that parliament withdraw Bill C-23, affirm the opposite sex definition of marriage in legislation and ensure that marriage is recognized as a unique institution.

Petitions April 11th, 2000

Mr. Speaker, pursuant to Standing Order 36, I have the pleasure to present a petition from people of Haliburton—Victoria—Brock. The petitioners pray that parliament act immediately to extend protection to the unborn child by amending the criminal code to extend the same protection enjoyed by born human beings to unborn human beings.

Petitions April 7th, 2000

Mr. Speaker, pursuant to Standing Order 36, I have the honour to present a petition from a number of people from Lindsay and the surrounding area, as well as Reaboro, who call on parliament to act immediately to request the provision of Canada's annual abortion statistics in order that more research can be done in other areas, such as infertility, sterility and post-abortion trauma.

Employment April 7th, 2000

Mr. Speaker, March 2000 saw the unemployment rate at 6.8%, the lowest since April 1976. New jobs increased by 30,000. That represents almost two million since this government took office in 1993. Every Canadian benefits from this success.

In Ontario employment grew by 28,000 new jobs for March and unemployment edged down to 5.6%. Nova Scotia employment grew by 4,000 more jobs in March 2000. Its unemployment rate is also falling and shows the lowest rate since February 1989.

This Liberal government is making very positive changes for all Canadians. Budget 2000 reflects that good news for small and medium size business. Congratulations to the Minister of Finance for his excellent budget.

First Nations Ombudsman Act April 4th, 2000

Madam Speaker, I am glad that I have struck a chord with the party formerly known as the Reform Party.

Our government wants to work with first nations, not to put them down, not to demean them, not to make them crawl into line somewhere in the former Reform Party's policies. First nations must have self-reliance. They cannot have a continued state of dependency. We would rather work with first nations as partners, not dictate to them like parents. In short, we would rather build for the future than return to the past.

First Nations Ombudsman Act April 4th, 2000

Madam Speaker, Haliburton—Victoria—Brock is a riding in central Ontario that enjoys some prosperity and good relations with some aboriginal groups and some that are even better.

It is a pleasure to rise and speak to Bill C-222. I believe the hon. member's motion has been inspired by a sincere desire to improve living conditions in aboriginal communities and to promote greater accountability for the management of funds or to encourage the development of aboriginal self-government.

Regrettably, his rhetoric today and in the past, and his party's well-known and oft-stated position with respect to aboriginal issues, leads me to a different conclusion.

The party, formerly known as the Reform Party, opposes aboriginal self-government. It would prefer to return to the good old days when a paternalistic Ottawa managed the affairs of first nations. It does not believe that aboriginal people can be trusted to manage their own concerns, make their own decisions or determine their own destiny. When there are different reports about poverty on reserves or financial difficulties in some aboriginal communities, it seizes upon that as proof that aboriginal people cannot be trusted and should not be encouraged to manage their own affairs.

We take a different view. This government believes that first nations can be trusted, that they are responsible and that they deserve to run their own lives. Our preference is for partnerships not paternalism and for co-operation not control.

Let me remind the House how we came to where we are today, how the issue of financial management has evolved over the years and why it is so important to demonstrate our continuing confidence in first nations as they make their way through this period of transition to self-government.

Until the late 1950s, the federal government delivered most programs and services directly to first nations. By the late 1970s first nations were administering some programs in accordance with terms and conditions set out by the Department of Indian Affairs and Northern Development.

In the 1980s the process of devolution began to pick up steam and new funding arrangements were developed. First nations were administering more programs, but still under the mandate of the Indian Act. Today 83% of our department's budget for programs is transferred directly to first nations and a further 11% to provinces for service delivery.

More importantly, in the 1990s, as we moved toward self-government, more and more first nations are assuming jurisdiction and greater responsibility for these programs. That means more and more they are planning and managing services based on the needs of their community. These new arrangements emphasize the relationship between chiefs, councils and their members.

This means that our primary role is no longer to deliver services to first nations but to design and manage financing arrangements that will allow first nations to deliver their own programs and be accountable for those programs for their memberships.

As we transfer more responsibility to the first nations, we are also working toward strengthening and building the skills and professional capacity within first nations that are needed to support these programs.

As funding arrangements have changed, so too has the issue of accountability. In the old days, when the federal government provided most of the programs and services directly, the lines of accountability were clear.

The departments involved, through their ministers, were responsible to parliament. Over time, as responsibilities devolved to first nations, efforts were made to promote local accountability; that is to say, first nations are becoming accountable to their constituents for the expenditures of funds and for the quality of programs and services they deliver.

In these times of limited resources, Canadians are insisting, quite rightly, that we manage tax dollars prudently. This is true of aboriginal and non-aboriginal governments alike. The same principles of accountability which apply to non-aboriginal governments also apply to first nations, principles like transparency, disclosure and redress. This means, for example, that first nations must disclose to their membership not only annual audits, but information such as the salaries of chiefs and councils, travel expenses and so on.

The federal government has worked with aboriginal governments to put in place financial standards that are comparable to other governments exercising similar responsibilities. The emphasis is now on making the information within first nations financial statements relevant and comprehensible to community members. Similarly, the accounting industry is starting to consider the needs of first nations when developing accounting standards.

Recently, as some first nations have assumed greater responsibilities and acquired significant assets, through land claims settlements for example, they have recognized the need for more sophisticated accounting systems. What we have seen is that first nations have gained the right to manage their affairs. They are moving to strengthen accountability and management practices.

Much of the progress in this area has not received the attention or publicity it deserves. Too often it is only the first nations communities that run into real financial problems that make it on to the news or into the papers. In fact, last year only 2% of first nations had their agreements placed under third party management. The simple fact is that most reserves are managing their finances properly. I believe this record reflects both the determination of first nations to manage their affairs responsibly and the creation of proper checks and balances.

When problems do arise, the department may intervene in a number of ways, depending on the problem. For example, we may simply make sure that the first nation is aware that there is a problem, encourage it to find solutions and offer advice. In other cases we will consult with the band more actively or hire a co-manager to address the difficulty. Only in a very few cases, the 2% I mentioned earlier, is it necessary to bring in a third party to stabilize the situation until a solution can be found. Some intervention does happen, but our favoured approach—and I am sure the House will agree it is a good one—is not intervention, but prevention.

The brief chronology I have sketched today shows the evolution of our relationship with first nations as a government. It highlights the increasing responsibility and accountability that has been assumed by first nations in recent years as they move toward exercising their inherent right to self-government. However, we must keep in mind that this is a story that is still being written. Yes, there have been growing pains along the way as we make the fundamental transitions in our relationship, but if we think that people are not exercising their judgment well, is the answer to take away their ability to choose or to inform their judgment?

The party formerly known as the Reform Party would have us take away the rights of first nations to choose, to grow and, yes, occasionally to make mistakes. Our government would rather work with first nations—

Supply April 4th, 2000

Okay, he has good dairy farms, but when we look at that as a part of Ontario, not many people from Nova Scotia would think that Ontario has one of the largest fishing industries in Canada. The internal waterway is a great resource.

We have to think beyond the megacity of Toronto and the problems it has, and go out into the ridings and areas which represent mainstream Ontario and some of the recreational facilities.

It is important to note that the minister of HRDC voluntarily made the report public. She did so as soon as the department managers came together with an acceptable plan to meet the identified deficiencies. These are not things which were brought out by the party formerly known as Reform. They were brought out by good control within the department's own management system.

Regarding controlling payments, no payments are made without written confirmation that the criteria are met. I know that to be a fact in looking at my riding and correcting past problems. Some of these agencies are made up of volunteers or made up of people who are not paid to be auditors, who are not paid to be managers, so they do the best they can. There were 37 projects flagged in the internal audit report and all other active files are being reviewed. I think that is a compliment.

The HRDC people are key to fixing these problems. It is not something that will happen through access to information. I firmly believe we are the most open in the world on that. The professional and dedicated people of the government who work on HRDC are the ones who will certainly bring this program into line, if in fact it needs to be brought into line, or whether it is not just the new word “boondoggle” that the Leader of the Opposition had a tough time even pronouncing, let alone spelling.

When HRDC is ensuring accountability, it has established a performance tracking unit to monitor the corrective actions and to provide regular reports. I think that is what is going on in each individual member's riding in HRDC offices right across this country, access to the best advice available. HRDC is in fact in regular contact with the office of the auditor general and several major accounting firms, so it is following up on all the things that need to be followed up on and it has made a commitment to openly report and to report objectively on the progress.

What it boils down to is the six point action plan is certainly seeing its way through the system and producing the results that we thought it would produce, that is that there are very few programs with which we have any trouble, other than in the eyes of the party formerly known as the Reform Party.

As members of parliament, it is important that we let our officials get on with implementing the plan. Many thousands of Canadians depend on these programs. If I go back to the Boys and Girls Club of Lindsay, I do not know how anyone in fairness could stand up and openly contest the good work that it does. I had no trouble throughout all these discussions, always leaning back and looking at exactly what was going on in my own riding and how that was helping the community. It certainly was helping the community.

We have heard from Canadians all across the country. I have heard from Canadians in my riding who are in support of making sure that we look after people who need to be looked after, that we look after people who are less fortunate than ourselves, that we look after the needy regions of the country. They are not just on the east coast or in the north. They are all over this great country of ours. There are pockets that have great need.

I want to speak a little bit about the tens of thousands of Canadians who depend on the support from HRDC. Whether it is helping people become more literate or whether it is helping people make their way in a world that is certainly difficult for people with disabilities, I think that those types of programs are in need of our support.

I recognize, as the member for Wentworth—Burlington has pointed out so many times, there are some 73,000 registered charities in Canada, all of which write members of parliament every day and all of which lobby the government to try to get more money. Some of them are very worthwhile and some of them we have our questions about. Some certainly should be looked at more closely. I think that is an area that the parties in opposition could look at more closely and maybe find some result or find out exactly what is going on there.

Madam Speaker, I know my time is coming to an end because you are waving your finger. I want to wrap up by saying that I do think that the auditor general believes the minister and her officials are following the right course to improve the administration of the department grants and contributions program with the six point plan. I would encourage them to get on with it and they will find, as I have, that the plan is working and that the problems exist only in the minds of the opposition.