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

Royal Canadian Mounted Police March 10th, 1998

Mr. Speaker, today Canadian police forces across this country have been meeting with parliamentarians to discuss issues of great concern to them.

One issue relates to the RCMP. And in my province of New Brunswick the provincial government has unilaterally replaced municipal police forces in the city of Moncton with the RCMP. And it plans to do the same in two other municipalities, the villages of Grand Bay and Westfield.

Our municipal police forces are worried, and rightfully so. When the RCMP comes in and takes over there is no guarantee that municipal police officers will be hired. Those who are hired do not enjoy the same employee rights that they once did under the provincial law.

Today these officers are in the gallery and are asking for a very simple measure from this government. On behalf of them, I urge the solicitor general to instruct the RCMP to adopt a takeover and hiring protocol similar to that employed by the Ontario Provincial Police.

The Budget February 26th, 1998

Mr. Speaker, health care is a very important issue in this country. You cannot go to college and get your degree if you do not have your health. You cannot go to work and pay your taxes if you do not have your health.

The medical society in Canada is begging for more money from this government. The Liberal finance ministers from Newfoundland and New Brunswick are saying there is no more money in this budget for health care. P.E.I. is saying the same thing.

When will the Minister of Finance stop the cutting and start the healing because he has devastated the health care system?

Supply February 23rd, 1998

Mr. Speaker, it is my understanding that all opposition parties would like to have a full impact analysis of the MAI. We also suggest that the MAI be subject to a final text which fully protects Canadian culture, but not only Canadian culture. I have heard much about that today, but I have not heard about the environment, labour standards, health, education and social services at the federal and sub-national levels.

I wonder what the member of the Reform Party feels about issues other than culture.

Health Care February 23rd, 1998

Mr. Speaker, health care in this country has been devastated by this government's slash and burn policy toward the transfer payments to the provinces.

Recently the federal health minister stated that more cash is not necessarily the cure for what ails the system.

In my province of New Brunswick we have seen another round of health care horror stories. Surgery waiting lists are growing. Doctors are leaving and patients are frightened, worried and stressed out.

A doctor in Saint John recently sent me a letter in which he outlined dangerous waiting times for surgical procedures in New Brunswick. A patient has to wait over six months for the removal of a brain tumour, four months for the repair of an abdominal problem. Patients also wait routinely one year for gall bladder and hernia repairs.

Doctors and health care services need more money now. Patients are suffering. The federal government must stop downloading on to the provinces. I urge the minister to listen to Canadians and restore health care funding.

Division No. 89 February 19th, 1998

Mr. Speaker, to my hon. friend for whom I have a great deal of respect, I just want him to know that it did go throw the process. It went through the House here and it was referred to the Senate, which is the normal process as we already know. Perhaps hon. members feel that should be looked at and assessed, but it did go through the House and it went through the normal process. The Senate looked at it and it will go through it again and it is over when it comes back from the Senate. There will be others that will come, but it goes through a normal process.

There was a time in the last Parliament when I personally had an opportunity to see the role they had to play when we did not have an official opposition that represented the whole of Canada. There was an opposition there that worked extremely hard. I would say they did not play party politics in the Senate all the time. They did what they thought was best. So there is a time when there is a need.

Division No. 89 February 19th, 1998

Mr. Speaker, I reiterate that it does not matter where the bills are introduced. We supported the NDP's motion today because of the procedural move, as all opposition parties voted against the government in a procedural move.

We have waited a long time. A city like mine has the largest tankers in the world at our ports. We can see them out there with the oil rigs. We are saying that this is long overdue. I thank the hon. member on the government side for working to ensure the bill's consideration in the House today. I thank all of those who were involved in bringing this bill before the House today.

Division No. 89 February 19th, 1998

Madam Speaker, I feel it does not matter whether it comes from the Senate or from here. It is whether it is a good bill or a bad bill and whether we have an opportunity to vote on it and to speak on it. It is long overdue and I am pleased that it is here. If it was the Senate that made it come here today, I am pleased because, coming from a shipping town, it is long overdue.

Being in the House today and hearing the comments that are being made about other people who also work for the betterment of Canadians, I found it tugging at my heart. Yes, we are also saying there has to be Senate reform and the senators are saying this. It is not just the Reformers who are saying it. Everybody knows that.

However, to do what we did today was a waste of time and energy and a cost to taxpayers. This should not have been done. We should have continued on with the debate. This has tugged at my heart. It was not easy because I know people who work hard in the Senate and I know some who do not show up. You deal with it. The majority of them work hard. If we need to make changes then we can deal with it in a way in which we do not have to point fingers at people.

As far as the bill goes, whether it came from the House, from the government side, from this side or from the Senate, if it is a good bill we deal with it. This is a good bill and I am pleased to be here to say that.

Division No. 89 February 19th, 1998

Madam Speaker, I am pleased to rise today to speak to Bill S-4, which amends the Canada Shipping Act as it pertains to maritime liability. It has taken a long time, too long in fact, for the bill to get to this stage, but because it is here now I am very pleased to speak to it.

I come from Saint John, New Brunswick, where we have the largest tankers in the world coming into our harbour because we have the largest privately owned oil refinery in Canada. I have had the pleasure of being taken out in a helicopter to fly over the largest tankers in the world. It is something to see.

Also in Saint John, New Brunswick, we have something that is unique in Canada and not anywhere else in Canada. It is a swivel anchor because we have the highest tides in the world. Mr. K. C. Irving devised this swivel anchor. When the largest tankers in the world come in, they hook on to this anchor out in the bay. As the tides rise we can see the tankers swing around and swing back again. It is very unusual.

I want my colleagues to know that Saint John, New Brunswick, is a very unique place. I invite all my colleagues to visit Saint John. When they come we will take them to the refinery so they can see what I am referring to.

The bill began as Bill C-58 in 1996. It went through a committee process and died on the order paper with the election call in April 1997.

There are important changes contained in the legislation. It is certainly a shame that the government did not recognize the importance of it at that time but instead chose other priorities over this one.

However, having said that, we are here now and we are dealing with the bill. I am pleased to be here to speak to it. The bill will substantially increase the amount of compensation available to Canadian claimants for maritime claims in general and for oil pollution damage in particular.

It also harmonizes Canadian rules for maritime liability with those of other maritime nations and will enable Canada to accede to relevant international conventions. This point is important. We must bring our rules into harmony with those of our major trading partners that carry both import and export cargoes each day to and from Canadian shores.

With respect to the part of the bill dealing with limitation of liability for maritime claims, Bill S-4 amends part IX of the Canada Shipping Act to implement the provisions of the 1976 convention on limitation of liability for maritime claims and its 1996 protocol.

Bill S-4 therefore will—and I am sure all my colleagues in the NDP would want to hear this—first, substantially increase ship owners limits of liability; second, allow cabinet on the recommendation of the transport minister to implement new limits of liability to reflect inflation; and, third, limit the liability of owners of small ships of less than 300 tonnes to $1 million for loss of life or personal injury and $500,000 for other claims.

It will also extend the application of the liability regime to all ships operating in Canada's inland waters, not just sea going vessels. Finally, it increases liability limits for owners of docks, canals and ports for property damage claims to the greater of $2 million or an amount based on the tonnage of the largest ship that has docked in the area in the last five years.

Another important aspect of the bill relates to oil pollution liability and compensation. Bill S-4 will amend part XVI of the Canada Shipping Act to implement the provisions of the 1992 protocol to the 1969 civil liability convention and the 1971 convention on the establishment of an international fund for compensation of oil pollution damage.

This will make ship owners liable for clean-up costs for oil pollution damage, and that is long overdue. It will make compensation available for pollution damage caused by tankers with residues of oil remaining from their previous cargo. It will also make it possible to recover costs incurred for preventive measures in anticipation of a spill from a tanker.

The maximum compensation currently available to claimants in an oil pollution incident is approximately $120 million. As a result of the bill, the amount will be more than double that to $270 million. That is important and is long overdue.

In summary, we are pleased to support the legislation. As I have stated, it is long overdue and very much needed in the maritime industry in Canada. We are supporting it because it will improve the compensation for the benefit of all Canadian claimants involved in any maritime accidents in general and certainly for purposes related to pollution claims.

Also the important harmonization of our laws with other nations in the world benefits every participant. Here I am speaking about all participants involved in maritime trade, shipowners, cargo owners and charters, by providing consistent, internationally recognized and accepted rules which deal with the economic consequences of unfortunate accidents at sea.

Without these formal rules, international shipping on which Canada relies to a tremendous degree would otherwise become extremely expensive and unpredictable. As a result, it would have negative consequences for the Canadian industry on the whole.

We support the legislation and only wish that it could have been moved a little more quickly through the legislative process. I want to thank all of those who were involved in bringing it before the House and the senators who worked so hard to make sure it was here today. It is good legislation and we will support it.

Small Business Loans Act February 19th, 1998

Mr. Speaker, if the government takes the steps to correct what the auditor general has stated with regard to the fact that they have not brought forth the proper recommendations, review and so on and so forth of the program, would the member and the Reform Party be in favour of the increase in the small business loans program as recommended by the government?

Supply February 18th, 1998

Madam Speaker, I heard the hon. member for Mississauga South referring to the Progressive Conservatives when they were in power. I want to say that when they were there, we had the trees, we had the planes, we had all modes of transportation.

I practically have to thumb to get to Ottawa these days with the cuts that have come from the government side. It is a serious situation where we have our young people who are hurting like never before.

When the Conservatives were in power they knew there were regions of Canada with different needs and they addressed them. This government has not done that and we have never hurt like this before.

What does he see? Has he been to New Brunswick? I thank him for calling me the mayor of Halifax, but the mayor of Saint John I was very proud to be for 12 years.

Has he been to New Brunswick? The people across Canada when they come find it the most wonderful place in the country. They want to help us. We had shipbuilding. We had marine. We had everything going until these people took power and within the last three and a half years devastated it. What will they do for the maritimes?