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

Biathlon Competition February 18th, 2003

Mr. Speaker, congratulations to Coach Barrie Ward and his team of seven cadets who turned in top performances at the recent Regional Biathlon Competition: Cory Gorrill, gold junior male, silver team relay; Katelyn Jones, silver junior female, silver relay; Beth Ward, bronze junior female; Riley Ward, bronze senior male, silver relay; Nicole Ward, silver senior female; Jessica Frankland, silver relay; and Tyler Sage, silver relay.

Good luck in the upcoming provincial championships and I hope to see them in March as they compete at the Nationals in New Brunswick.

Curling February 13th, 2003

Mr. Speaker, at the recent provincial curling championship, the Nokia Cup, held in Mississauga at the Hershey Centre, a demonstration game was held by two special Olympic teams.

I wish to congratulate both teams, but in particular the team from Lindsay, Ontario, skipped by Tim Keenan. His rink consisted of vice Dale Morgan, second Rob Bowins and lead Jason Kilgannon.

Coaches Finni Verbik, Elizabeth Crum, Susan Banks and Lorraine Mullen can be proud of their work with the team known as the Hard Rockers.

Canada Elections Act February 12th, 2003

Mr. Speaker, I enjoyed the member's speech. I want to ask him to deal with the specifics of the bill that are contrary to or that he feels would be an improvement over the present legislation that exists in Quebec. I know that he has made a couple of comments about the similarities of the bill with the legislation of Quebec and Manitoba.

I would like to hear him expand on just exactly what it is he is looking for in regard to improvements in the bill so that we might have some idea on how he feels that this particular legislation could be improved upon.

Interparliamentary Delegations January 29th, 2003

Mr. Speaker, pursuant to Standing Order 34(1) I have the honour to present to the House, in both official languages, the report of the Canadian NATO Parliamentary Association, which represented Canada at the meeting of the 48th annual session of the NATO Parliamentary Assembly, held in Istanbul, Turkey from November 15 to 19, 2002.

Assisted Human Reproduction Act January 28th, 2003

Mr. Speaker, I want to point out a couple of items in the bill that bother me and that would make me want to support the amendments to the bill.

I noticed in the agency part of the bill that the minister in Motion No. 72 has actually moved to delete 10 lines on page 17. It appears to me that she is endorsing the conflict of interest part of this agency that we are fighting against. In other words, she would be endorsing the fact that anyone who sat on a pharmaceutical board, who was involved in research and could make a profit from the bill, would be allowed to do so with that particular deletion. I would have to look for a lot of clarification on that before I could consider that to be a good amendment.

I believe that conflict of interest to this House is an issue that we all take extremely seriously and that we should look at in the light that whether it is upcoming legislation that involves corporate donations or whether it is a simple thing like a ticket to a hockey game from a corporate sponsor for a member of Parliament, a person may ask “What is the next thing?”.

According to what I read in Motion No. 72, “That Bill C-13, in Clause 26, be amended by deleting lines 10 to 17 on page 17”, it would allow conflicts of interest among the board. I do not think that is right.

I also want to comment on the standardization, the forms and the agency that would be being formed here: the terms, conditions, options and so forth in Motion No. 55 in the name of the member for Mississauga South. The motion includes:

details on the option to give embryos up for adoption; and

the facts related to what percentage of embryos donated for embryonic stem cell research are likely to produce stem cell lines that would meet the research quality requirements.

I have an adopted daughter. We have spent an inherent amount of time being private detectives trying to find out her history. No history is available, at least none that I know of. I searched everything from the birth mother's OHIP number, the old Ontario hospital insurance number, to searching CPIC to see if the person has a driver's licence but none of those exist. I have gone down the path of trying to find the history of someone in my own family. It is for their information not for mine. I am quite happy to accept everyone as they are.

However the fact is that she wants to know her lineage, her roots and what the possible connections could be genetically that cause us to be in certain forms, such as whether one keeps a good head of hair, like the member from Calgary, whether one is bald, or whether one is allergic to peas or to something else. Some of these things cannot be found out until it actually happens, whereas if there is genetic information available one can be on the lookout for it.

In my own case, all the men in the O'Reilly family, previous to me coming along, all died in their late forties and early fifties. No one knew why until we researched it and found out that there was a genetic problem that sets in around the age of 45 to 47 where blood pressure starts to elevate. Back in the forties and fifties blood pressure was not something that anyone looked at as a problem. Being able to trace that, knowing what to look for, seeking the proper medication and doing the things that can be done, we can preserve and make our lives longer.

I am most interested in the fact that transparency not be removed from the bill, that it be very transparent and that people will be allowed to know the health and the history of their parents.

As we go through the bill and the amendments to it, we should keep in mind that this bill deals with life itself. It deals with the reproduction of human beings. It deals with what can happen with the recent scandal over Clonaid and those people who pretended they cloned someone. We need to make sure that when we examine the bill that we examine it all the way through and that we look at every clause, not taking a particular line because someone is a right wing fanatic, or someone is a religious lunatic, or someone is maybe standing up for the rights of the unborn.

We have to look at the rights of people who, like myself, have adopted children. I think those children have a right to know their background. They have a right to know what they can expect in their growing years and what they can expect to find out from their genetics.

In conclusion, I just want the House to know, and certainly the people who have phoned my office with concerns about the bill, that we are reading it and going through it line by line. I look forward to debating Group No. 2, which, by the way, I cannot read because it is messed up. I hope we get to the bottom of that and find out that it is placed properly. I seconded the motions from the member for Mississauga South. I did it not just to fill in the numbers but because I believe in what he has brought forward.

National Defence December 6th, 2002

Mr. Speaker, the minister has said many times that he wants to get the right aircraft for the Canadian Forces as soon as possible. He moved yesterday to announce that he is doing just that. These aircraft will be on stream quicker on a single source contract and they will be fully equipped to replace the Sea Kings.

This approach accelerates the process, has less risk and reduces the cost to Canadians. It is expected that the winning bid will be announced some time in 2004.

National Defence November 29th, 2002

Mr. Speaker, it is not something on which the Government of Canada will comment. As far as JTF2 is concerned, it is a unit that operates in complete privacy. It is there to protect the Canadian public, not harass the Canadian public, as the member has said.

It continues to do an excellent job and has done an excellent job. It is coming home soon. Perhaps the member could come and meet some of them.

Parliamentary Reform November 21st, 2002

Mr. Speaker, I am always interested in what the member for Calgary—Nose Hill has to say. She has a very interesting perspective and dissertation.

She indicated that she was in favour of the plan. I did not quite understand how she agreed with the Liberal plan but ran against it. She wants the opposition to appoint the cabinet. That would then mean that the government side would appoint the critics. I am not too sure how far this goes; I am trying to get this straight in my head.

Democracy is based on a majority rule. The government in power has an obligation to govern and the opposition is paid to oppose and is supposed to offer alternatives.

What are the positive rules she would ask to have changed to modernize the way Parliament operates? I would be interested in her views on that.

Ross Memorial Hospital November 21st, 2002

Mr. Speaker, this week marks a significant event in health care for the residents of Lindsay, Ontario and the surrounding area known as the Kawartha Lakes Region.

One hundred years ago, through the generosity of James and Annie Ross, the Ross Memorial Hospital was established to meet the medical needs of the residents of the town of Lindsay and the surrounding area. Now a regional health centre of excellence, the Ross is undergoing a major expansion program and the people have responded by donating a total of $6 million.

I wish to congratulate the professional health care workers, support staff, volunteers and auxiliary personnel for their dedication to excellence.

Points of Order November 20th, 2002

Mr. Speaker, I wanted to interject in this conversation because I was there yesterday also. As the House is aware, I was under a death threat at one time in the House. I studied security in the House. I looked at the parliamentary precinct we work in.

I want members to know that I do not think it is any secret that there are over six security systems that work within the House and the other place. We have House of Commons security, the Burns type security that run the groups that go into parliament and the PMO has security. If 9-1-1 is called, the Ottawa police cannot respond to the House because there are so many security systems here.

I would suggest that it is time the House take action and form one security service for Parliament Hill. I have asked for this since 1998. Do members realize that plain clothes people can carry guns but uniformed people cannot. They are not in the same union. They do not have the same radio bands. They cannot talk to each other from one side of this House to the other side of the Hill.

Yesterday's incident was appalling to me because I have been through that. It is time Mr. Speaker that you and the House acted on this and that we finally have a security system that is a Parliament Hill precinct security system. If anyone objects to that, I would be glad to talk to them about it, but it is time.