House of Commons photo

Crucial Fact

  • His favourite word was made.

Last in Parliament May 2004, as Liberal MP for Ottawa South (Ontario)

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

Statements in the House

Direct Satellite Broadcasting June 22nd, 1995

Mr. Speaker, after reading the communique released by the Bloc Quebecois this afternoon, I think that the party should be called the "blague québécoise", the Quebec joke. We held all kind of consultations, including public ones, and we received the report of a committee of experts, as well as several submissions, including some from groups such as the Consumers' Association of Canada, Friends of Canadian Broadcasting and the Conference of the Arts. Those groups urged us to accept the proposals made by the committee of experts. I should also mention the majority report tabled by the committee, as well as the report of the Senate, where the government does not have a majority. We are told that we did the appropriate thing.

Business Development Bank Of Canada Act June 21st, 1995

moved:

Motion No. 24

That clause 37 of Bill C-91 be amended by substituting the following:

"Except with the consent in writing of the Bank, a person must not in any prospectus or advertisement, or for any other business purpose, use the name of the Bank, the names "B.D. Canada", "Federal Business Development Bank" or "Industrial Development Bank" or the initials "B.D.B.C." or "F.B.D.B", in English, or the names "Banque fédérale de développement", "Banque d'expansion industrielle" or "B.D. Canada" or the initials "B.D.C" or "B.F.D", in French."

Defence Industry June 21st, 1995

Mr. Speaker, I know the Bloc supports high tech companies like Monsanto and Eli-Lilly.

I would remind him that Quebec is not the only province with a high tech sector, particularly in aerospace. There are companies all over Canada, such as Pratt & Whitney, which is located not only in Montreal but also in Lethbridge and Halifax, and is very concerned about international competition for grants from the government. We are very much aware of this competition and have some ideas to propose for this sector.

Defence Industry June 21st, 1995

Mr. Speaker, we discussed this issue last week. As I indicated then to the member, I acknowledge that DIPP is very important, but the government has decided to reduce grants to Canadian private enterprise and to review DIPP.

We think that it has long been an important program in Canada, but this does not mean that this sort of program should not be reviewed. Perhaps the member has some ideas that could be adopted.

Business Development Bank Of Canada Act June 21st, 1995

moved that the bill be concurred in and read the second time.

Employment June 20th, 1995

Mr. Speaker, I am sure members share the hon. member's concern for the individuals in her constituency who have been impacted by this decision by Nortel and have lost their jobs. It is always an unfortunate consequence when corporations take decisions with respect to restructuring.

I would like to point out that there is some good news both for Bramalea in this decision where the Nortel is consolidating its head office functions. It will operate as the international head office for the corporation as well as for Brockville, Ontario where 400 new manufacturing jobs have been created.

On the broader question, I would like to point out this important fact so we understand exactly where our future lies in building international trade. Nortel's sales to Canadian customers have declined by 45 per cent since 1990. At the same time, its export sales are up from $784 million to $2.6 billion and Canadian manufacturing jobs have increased by over 1,000 in that time.

Export sales are the way we are going to succeed in the future.

Crtc June 20th, 1995

Frankly, Mr. Speaker, the ethical question here is why the member persists on standing in the House and making false accusations. That is an ethical question.

The real question is where that party stands. We set in place the process. The process has been transparent and is provided for in the Broadcasting Act. We have followed it entirely, completely, openly and honestly.

This is not a draft final order if such a hybrid thing could exist. This is simply a process of consultation with the CRTC. We will follow it to its conclusion. There is no final order until cabinet makes a final order.

I can assure the hon. member that will only occur after the 40 days have been completed. If she has one, single, solitary, substantive suggestion I would be delighted to hear it.

Crtc June 20th, 1995

Mr. Speaker, the hon. member made extreme allegations concerning the respect for process. I refer her to sections 7 and 8 of the Broadcasting Act. If she can identify in those provisions anywhere the government has failed to follow the provisions of the act, I would like to hear from her about that. In the meantime I would also like to hear from her as to the position of her party on the report the expert panel made to us with respect to satellite broadcasting in Canada.

We know the senior political adviser to the leader of the Reform Party has already admitted he has been retained by the Expressvu consortium. We would like to know what role he has played in deciding Reform Party policy on this issue?

Crtc June 20th, 1995

Mr. Speaker, I would really like to see this draft final order. It must be an interesting hybrid.

I call the member's attention to the provisions of the Broadcasting Act-

Crtc June 20th, 1995

Mr. Speaker, it is a little difficult to take seriously the protestations of the hon. member about wanting to be consulted when she follows them up with ridiculous accusations such as she has.

We have followed to the letter the requirements of the Broadcasting Act in order to consult with both Parliament and the CRTC.

Although we have heard these accusations repeated over and over, we have not once heard from the hon. member whether she agrees with the panel of experts, whose recommendations we

acted on in April, or whether she agrees with the Friends of Canadian Broadcasting, the Consumers Association of Canada or any of the groups that have supported the action the government has taken. Instead she makes these accusations.

I would like to know, since it is clear the government stands on behalf of competition and in favour of consumers, choice and lower prices, what does the Bloc Quebecois stand for except to stand with the proposed monopolies?