House of Commons photo

Crucial Fact

  • Her favourite word was saint.

Last in Parliament May 2004, as Progressive Conservative MP for Saint John (New Brunswick)

Won her last election, in 2000, with 51% of the vote.

Statements in the House

Parliamentary Interns Food Drive December 14th, 1999

Mr. Speaker, it is ironic that in the national capital of one of the richest countries on earth, over a 120,000 residents of Ottawa-Carleton live below the poverty line. Of these, 30,000 require some form of daily food assistance. In the land of plenty these numbers should shame us all.

Again this year, thanks to our parliamentary interns, MPs and all Hill staff will have the opportunity to take a personal stand against hunger. Non-perishable food collection boxes are set up around the parliamentary precinct. The interns will also be visiting our offices to collect food and cash donations. The dollar amount collected will be doubled by the Canadian Bankers Association.

I would like all members to recall that fortune has not smiled so kindly on all in society. Hunger and cold does not end when the holidays are over. The generosity of spirit that this magical time of year imparts to us must be a year-long commitment. We truly must be each other's keepers. I thank the interns.

Tenth Anniversary Of Tragedy At École Polytechnique December 6th, 1999

Mr. Speaker, I rise today with tears in my eyes and a heavy heart, as I am sure many of our colleagues in the House also do today, for 10 years ago Canada was changed. We in this country have always been blessed with the ability to say that we live in a nation better than all others.

Ten years ago one man armed with his hatred forced us to view a darker version of ourselves, a Canada no different than the foreign societies we fear. He did this by taking from us the lives of 14 young beautiful women in their prime from our own backyard. It defined us as a country that no longer has to look outside its borders to find an example of malicious and senseless violence.

It changed us as a people. We could no longer say that horrors such as these did not happen in our Canada. Although I did not know these brave little souls, I came to know of their innocence and their courage. We as a country came to know them to be no different from our daughters, our sisters, our neighbours and our friends.

We remember them not only as the only victims of violence against women, but as those whose story was so tragic that it forced the nation to turn its attention to the violent cruelty faced by women across the land at the hands of others.

It is not enough to merely remember these brave women and mourn their loss, without taking the steps necessary to ensure that a horror of this kind does not take place again.

Today across the country the spirit of these young women will serve as a call to action. Whether from Saint John, Saskatoon, Medicine Hat or Montreal, Canadians will stand together and condemn violence against women. They will gather to pray and to comfort. They will gather to harness strength and initiative. They will acknowledge the good that has been done in the name of those slain and focus on the challenges that lie before us.

On behalf of the Right Hon. Joe Clark, our leader of the PC Party of Canada, and all of our colleagues in the House, we wish to convey our deepest, heartfelt sympathies, unchanged by the passage of time to the families and loved ones of the 14 women. They will, as will their families, remain in our hearts, our thoughts and our prayers always, en souvenir de leurs vies.

Human Resources December 2nd, 1999

Mr. Speaker, the changes to the Employment Insurance Act by the government have created more problems than they have solved.

There is inflexibility in the act that does not take into account the special needs of women. Because of the new system, less women qualify for EI. This has had an negative impact on their families.

Will the minister initiate a full scale review of this legislation and commit to make the changes required to correct the injustices against women and their families?

Human Resources December 2nd, 1999

Mr. Speaker, yesterday I gave the Minister of Human Resources Development the opportunity to condemn the practice of those companies receiving funds from the TJF and then making donations to political parties, but he refused to say that the practice was even inappropriate or that a problem even existed.

I will give the minister a second chance to say that this is wrong for companies that have accepted money from the Canada jobs fund and then give money to political parties and government. Will the minister stand in the House today and say that this is wrong?

Transitional Jobs Fund December 1st, 1999

Mr. Speaker, there are many in the House who are in the Christmas spirit, but the Minister of Human Resources Development seems to forget that it is better to give than to receive.

The minister continues to deny even the possibility that the TJF money was handed over inappropriately.

In the spirit of the upcoming holiday, will the minister guarantee that her New Year's resolution will be to ensure that the Canada jobs fund money will only go to those ridings with serious and legitimate unemployment problems?

Transitional Jobs Fund December 1st, 1999

Mr. Speaker, things must not only be right but they must appear to be right. In March 1997 a company called Bas Iris received over $8 million from the transitional jobs fund. That company is based in the riding of Anjou—Rivière-des-Prairies. It gave over $5,000 to the government candidate in the election and over $1,000 to the governing party.

Will the Minister of Human Resources Development not agree that it is inappropriate for companies receiving funds from a government program to turn around and give money back to a political party that gave it the money?

Hockey November 26th, 1999

Mr. Speaker,

Last night in Ottawa, was a night to remember, Our hockey team beat, every Liberal member.

T'was a sign of the times to come A government left, cold and numb

The Corel Centre...was our rink, Hec, the team yonder really did stink.

Reform and the Tories, the NDP and the Bloc, Sure gave the Liberals quite a big shock.

We scored for the Sea Kings and for the GST... Toward the end, they just scored for me.

The Liberal backbenches were terribly shook, Not so much confusion, since the red book.

Perhaps they'd play better if not on the fence, Out there, like in here, they have no defence.

Although not a psychic, I will make these projections, Liberal defeats in the next three elections.

And for the little member who just wore his hat, I've just got to say...how about that!

When my Saint John Flames score, We let out a big roar.

So Mr. Speaker let's hear that roar... The opposition beat the Liberals...6 to 4!

National Defence November 25th, 1999

Mr. Speaker, according to what we were told this morning, everyone has agreed, with the exception that the minister has not signed off on this. We are talking about the lives of our pilots and the men and women who are in these helicopters.

Contrary to an internal department document received through access to information which informed the minister that a maritime helicopter replacement program would take eight years, the minister yesterday testified that the replacements would be active in five years. Obviously the minister has more information than we have.

Will the minister table in the House all of the exact details, including the time line of the Sea King replacement program that he has—

National Defence November 25th, 1999

Mr. Speaker, two days ago the Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of National Defence told the House that the maritime replacement program was on the minister's desk awaiting his decision. Today the Vice-Admiral of Defence Staff testified at our defence committee meeting that he signed off on the statement of requirements at the end of June.

Will the minister please stop saying that the Sea King replacement program is his number one priority and now make it his number one priority by initiating this program before the House rises at Christmastime?

Municipal Grants Act November 25th, 1999

A day? This one says an hour. I do not care if it is a day or what it is, not one of them would ask for that. I cannot believe we are doing this.

With the federation of municipalities wanting to deal and co-operate with the federal government, more than likely its members would ask only for their expenses to be paid. They probably would ask for no remuneration whatsoever. But no dialogue took place with them on this issue.

The bill requires members to have relevant knowledge or experience but it does not define that term. If we want relevant knowledge or experience at the local level, all we have to do is take some mayors and councillors—and it does not matter if they vote Liberal or not—and put them on that committee. Perhaps it might be better if they did not vote Liberal. We might then be able to have someone with an open mind.

Presumably relevant knowledge or experience could mean any person who is a member in good standing of the Liberal Party, which concerns me a little bit. It would be much better, as I have stated, if the members were required to be a certified member of a professional organization as well. There are a lot of them who are members of the Federation of Canadian Municipalities.

I would not mind if the bill would allow public servants, including municipal employees, to serve on the panel, but I do not want them to be in a conflict because they are hired by the mayors and councillors. If they come back with a recommendation that is in conflict with what the mayors and councillors of the municipalities where they work are feeling on certain issues, then it would make it most difficult for them. I must say that at the local level we do have some very qualified people whose input could be used. When I look at the panel that is one of the major concerns I have.

There are two major concerns. I feel very strongly that the federal government should be paying taxes just the same as the private sector and everyone else. It should pay its taxes just the same as my family pays their taxes. Why should it be any different? It is the same as the provincial governments paying their taxes. If we were able to make everyone feel equal and feel that no one was getting any special treatment, the local people would have a better feeling about this issue.

The panel is supposed to be appointed by the minister. The panel will be paid by the government. The panel reports only to the minister and its decisions are not public.

I cannot believe we are bringing in a bill like this. If the bill does come in then the recommendations should certainly be made public. The next thing we know secret letters will go out to everybody else and somebody will get a copy that was not supposed to be made public. If we make it public it will not look like we are hiding anything.

When it says that the panel serves at the pleasure of the minister, which means the minister can say “I do not like what you have brought in so I am going to remove you and put somebody else in there”, that worries me as well.

We are very much in favour of some parts of the bill, but there are concerns, and I feel very strongly that those concerns should be addressed. There is no question that there should be changes.

We also talk about grants in lieu of taxes. These are difficult times on the Hill because once again the government has seen fit to spend the money, perhaps in an irresponsible way, but the next thing we know the grants could be eliminated in lieu of taxes and nothing would be there for the municipalities. What would happen then? The local governments would have to raise their taxes to make up for what the federal government would not be giving.

I have a major concern with the federal government telling me and all Canadians that it will give us grants in lieu of taxes. This tells me that it does not want to pay the full tax.

The concerns that I have are concerns that my party has. We would like to see a legislative review. If that panel is put in place by the minister and he makes these appointments from all across Canada, we want to see a legislative review of the panel after five years to see if it is working well and to allow the House to make any changes that are necessary.

When we talk about setting up and paying someone $125 a day plus expenses to sit on a committee, this is when people in Canada get very discouraged, they truly do. When we are at the local level, we get very discouraged with that. That is not necessary.

As I stated earlier in my remarks, this should go to the Federation of Canadian Municipalities. This should all be tabled until the Federation of Canadian Municipalities has been able to sit down, discuss this and have its total input into the bill.

I think this is probably the only government that has been in power that has never sat down with the president and the board of directors of the Federation of Canadian Municipalities when dealing with issues like this. I cannot believe that the Liberals talk about grants in lieu of taxes when they have not even had the input from those at the local level whom it will affect.

As far as the bill goes, I feel very strongly that it should be tabled until that input is there and until we hear back from the Federation of Canadian Municipalities as to whether or not it is in support of it or whether or not it feels there should be changes.