House of Commons photo

Crucial Fact

  • Her favourite word was forces.

Last in Parliament December 2009, as NDP MP for New Westminster—Coquitlam (B.C.)

Won her last election, in 2008, with 42% of the vote.

Statements in the House

Afghanistan October 17th, 2006

Mr. Speaker, last week, in an attempt to sell their unbalanced mission in Afghanistan, the Conservatives hauled in reporters to brief them on so-called development programs.

An examination of the claims has uncovered that the government has inflated the numbers by as much as $16 million. It claimed that $16 million were going to Afghanistan and it simply is not.

Why did the minister wilfully mislead reporters? Did she inflate her numbers to try to sell this unbalanced mission, the war in Afghanistan?

Afghanistan October 6th, 2006

Mr. Speaker, last night the NDP held a non-partisan round table discussion on Canada's role in Afghanistan. The event was attended by a number of my caucus colleagues, including our leader, and hundreds of concerned Canadians. It was standing room only.

Ironically, early in the day the Liberals and Conservatives in the other place issued a report which blasted Liberals and Conservatives in this chamber for their failure to have answers on Canada's current mission in Afghanistan. The report pointed to the failings of the government to explain: What is the purpose of this mission? Is the mandate clear and realistic? Can the success of the mission be measured and how? These are the very same questions the NDP has been asking. They are the very same questions Canadians are asking.

The Prime Minister got it wrong in Calgary this morning. The price of leadership in the world and the price of moving forward is not measured by the number of casualties Canada endures. Rather, it is measured by its efforts to bring about enduring peace, not enduring war.

Softwood Lumber Products Export Charge Act, 2006 October 6th, 2006

Mr. Speaker, many ridings across the country have experienced economic impacts from the softwood lumber dispute, but the changes in my riding have been particularly acute.

New Westminster, Coquitlam and Port Moody were once part of the engine of the forest industry in British Columbia, with many mills and ports collecting the harvests of B.C. and sending products out through the Fraser River and on to the Pacific. The quay in New Westminster used to bustle with lumber traffic, but no longer.

Several large lumber mills have closed over the past decade, such as the Fraser Mills plant of International Forest Products Limited, formerly owned by Fletcher Challenge, and the plywood plant at Fraser Mills, which was closed in November 1990. The Flavelle Cedar Division of Weldwood of Canada Ltd. in Port Moody also closed, and Interfor closed its remaining manufacturing facility at Fraser Mills in September 2005. The only lumber mill still running is the smaller Flavelle mill in Port Moody.

I was in the House of Commons when the last Conservative government signed the free trade agreement. It is clear that the Canadian people were sold a bill of goods about the benefits of that agreement.

Mechanisms were supposed to be in place that would stop punitive trade actions of the past. Dispute resolutions and harmonization of trade, we were told, would be the result.

However, this softwood sellout lays bare the results of the FTA and NAFTA. It seems the Americans never intended to play by the rules. Once the going got tough, the Bush administration has found a willing partner in the Conservative government for the sellout of our softwood lumber industry.

This deal is based on a falsehood that Canadian softwood lumber industries are subsidized. This falsehood was exposed and rejected in each and every NAFTA and U.S. commercial court ruling. Each and every ruling has sided with the Canadian industry. Despite unequivocal dispute settlement decisions and trade court rulings, the U.S. will not play by the rules, and the Conservative government has capitulated.

The Conservative government is allowing the U.S. to abandon the rules when it does not like the results. Canada won major legal battles under the North American Free Trade Agreement and U.S. commercial courts, and Canada was just a few months away from winning the final two legal cases which would have voided the dispute and refunded every cent of the $5.3 billion in illegal levies.

Incredibly, now, we are leaving a billion dollars on the table. The deal gives $500 million in funds, owed to the Canadian softwood industry, to the U.S. Coalition for Fair Lumber Imports, which will no doubt continue to hammer away at our industry.

The sellout sets a bad precedent not only for softwood lumber but for other industrial sectors in Canada. This deal opens the door to U.S. attacks on every Canadian industry the U.S. now wants to target. The remaining industries in British Columbia may now come under further attack because of this unravelling of NAFTA.

The softwood lumber agreement will further downsize the Canadian softwood industry and there will be huge impacts on softwood communities in British Columbia and on workers throughout British Columbia and Canada.

Mill & Timber Products Ltd., which now owns the Flavelle cedar sawmill in Port Moody, is opposed to this deal. It has a long history in our community, but has suffered because of the aggressive and illegal actions of the U.S. softwood lobby.

It seems the only companies that are in favour of this softwood sellout are the ones that are headquartered in the U.S. We know this deal is bad for smaller and older companies, but it is supported by the multinationals. We know that thousands of jobs have been lost in smaller communities throughout British Columbia and other parts of Canada.

What does this deal say about the direction in which our country is going?

Many Canadians have said to me that they feel our country slipping through their fingers. Whether it is on foreign policy, which is quickly becoming a branch plant of the White House, or weakening sovereignty at our borders and our coastlines, Canadians know the government is moving us in the wrong direction.

It is entirely possible, once the money is given to the Americans, that they will decide to unilaterally suspend the deal and we will be back again at square one. Communities and industries will have gone through a huge struggle, and for what? The stability that our industry needs will only come when the court victories we have won are enforced and the Americans begin to play by the rules to which they agreed. We are certainly not going to achieve that result by wimping out and backing down.

We know this deal is wrong because it sells out our industry. We know its wrong because it sells out our communities. It sells out thousands of working families in British Columbia and Canada. We know its wrong because it sets a precedent that allows our largest trading partner to ignore trade agreements and all agreements it has signed with us.

The government will now have to stop any pretense that we have a free trade agreement with the U.S. It is just not there. It is a very sad day for Canada. It is a sad day for our working families, which rely on the lumber industry to feed their families. It is a very sad day for those small communities in British Columbia and across Canada that will feel the very negative impact that the government has achieved by selling out Canadian interest in the softwood deal.

Afghanistan October 5th, 2006

Mr. Speaker, the minister has a reputation for strong and blunt answers. I wish, just once, he would get up in the House and not give all the empty rhetoric.

Now that the U.S. Republicans, no less than the Senate majority leader Bill Frist, are asking for peace talks in Afghanistan, is the minister finally ready to listen? Will the government step up to the plate and help kick-start peace talks in Afghanistan?

Afghanistan October 5th, 2006

Mr. Speaker, today former commander Colonel Mike Capstick cites some of the major problems with the mission in Afghanistan. He cites the blunder of the wrong number of soldiers being sent, warlords and drug criminals in the Afghan government and, most interesting, humanitarian aid that never arrives.

If the government could admit it only spends $1 on aid for every $9 on combat, why can it not admit that aid is not getting through because this is the wrong mission? It is an unbalanced mission.

Business of Supply October 5th, 2006

I apologize, Mr. Speaker.

My question for the hon. member is, how can he support this agreement when it in turn will bring more and more displaced workers to every region of Canada, including Quebec?

Business of Supply October 5th, 2006

Mr. Speaker, I listened to my colleague across with great interest and agree with much of what he said about support for displaced workers. It is something that needs to be done, but I have a question that flows from that support for displaced workers.

I am surprised that your political party is supporting the softwood deal with the U.S. that the Conservative government has put forward, because we all know that in my community and in communities across Quebec there will be lots of displaced workers due to that softwood agreement. Yet you are supporting that agreement, so I see an inherent--

Afghanistan October 2nd, 2006

Mr. Speaker, the previous Liberal administration took the U.S. on its word and look what happened to Maher Arar. The Canadian government has not asked to follow up on one single detainee.

Canadians want assurances that our soldiers' values and international law are not compromised if Afghani authorities hand over prisoners captured by Canadians to the U.S.

In light of what happened to Mr. Arar, does the government really trust the U.S. administration to tell the truth about where it holds Canadian captured insurgents?

Afghanistan October 2nd, 2006

Mr. Speaker, Canadians recognize that this government is too close to George Bush, especially when it comes to foreign policy. Incredibly, the U.S. Congress is passing a law that will give the President the power to interpret the meaning and application of the Geneva conventions.

Documents show that this government is fully aware of the fact that prisoners we hand over to the Afghans can be given to U.S. authorities.

What assurances is this government seeking that prisoners handed over to Afghan authorities are not sent on to Guantanamo Bay or to secret U.S. prisons?

Housing September 20th, 2006

Mr. Speaker, victims of the leaky condo disaster in B.C.'s Lower Mainland have been waiting for years for leadership from the federal government to get to the bottom of this fiasco that has tens of thousands of victims, has cost billions of dollars and has negatively affected the health of many.

The cities of Coquitlam and Port Moody have both passed motions demanding that the federal government conduct a review into the role of CMHC in the leaky condo crisis, and I support this call.

The Prime Minister made a commitment during the election campaign to review this situation and said that he would consider compensation. The government has failed to deliver and the Minister of Human Resources has backed away from the Prime Minister's campaign commitments.

On behalf of leaky condo owners in New Westminster, Coquitlam, Port Moody and all affected communities, and on behalf of leaky housing co-ops, I call upon the Prime Minister to fulfill his election promise and call an inquiry into CMHC and its possible role in the thousand--