Adam Vaughan

[Rouge National Urban Park Act, December 12th, 2014]

Mr. Speaker, I filed a petition in the House related to this issue, complaining about the fact that there was a lack of an agreement between the province and the federal government as this project moved forward. It said that there was a lack of transparency and accountability around a very particular issue, which is the issue of agricultural run-off into a river that flows into Lake Ontario, the source of drinking water for virtually everybody in southern Ontario.

The provincial government has been explicit. It does not want to sign on to this project until we have an understanding of how agriculture will be protected and managed, and how it will contribute to the ecological benefit of the entire region, not just within the park but within all of southern Ontario. The government has said that everything is completely out in the open, yet we have petition after petition, complaining that this process has gone forward too fast and without the consent of the provincial government.

When will the government sit down with the Premier of Ontario, the people of Ontario and the residents who have to live with this decision, and ensure that the highest ecological principles are protected and that the largest park possible is built?

[Drug-Free Prisons Act, December 8th, 2014]

Mr. Speaker, I noted with interest the issue of solitary confinement. I am sure we are all aware of the extraordinary psychological damage this does to prisoners, who are expected to be returned not just to the general prison population but to society at some point.

I was wondering if the member could tell us more about his concerns over a prison system that seems more intent on punishment than on reform and more intent on looking strong than on reforming and rehabilitating. It is a prison system that puts prisoners in harm's way, especially in light of the suicide figures that were quoted.

[Ethics, December 4th, 2014]

Mr. Speaker, in 2007, the Prime Minister appointed Mark McQueen as the head of the Toronto Port Authority. The federal guidelines that govern the political activities of Governor in Council appointees clearly state that public office holders should not participate in political activity. Under the guidelines, contributing money to political parties at any level of government is explicitly forbidden. In 2008, Mr. McQueen donated more than $1,000 to the Conservative Party. This is a violation of the rules.

Will the Prime Minister immediately dismiss this port authority member, and will the party give back the dirty money?

[Economic Action Plan 2014 Act, No. 2, December 4th, 2014]

Mr. Speaker, I heard the member opposite talk in the last few days about this extraordinary transparency and how most of the measures in this bill were announced months ago. In fact, a couple of provisions were neither announced months ago nor had any consultation.

On the provisions related to the port authorities, not a single port authority in this country has been consulted, not a single municipality with a port authority in this country has been consulted. When we asked questions at the technical briefing, this was confirmed by staff. Why did the government not consult with anybody before bringing these measures forward?

[Business of Supply, December 3rd, 2014]

Mr. Speaker, I note with interest that there had been 28 provincial governments led by the NDP and not one of them has ever proposed this. In fact, every single time proportional representation has been put on the ballot for a referendum, it has been done by a Liberal provincial government, but somehow our support is in question. It is strange.

The critical piece here is that we are being asked to support a very specific proposal with a very vague motion and the challenge that we have is trying to understand exactly what the member means. She talks about the concern about lack of representation from certain groups. What we find is that the trade-off for that is massively bigger ridings.

I have a colleague from Labrador who can barely get to her entire riding within a given year because of its size. The hon. member is proposing to make it even bigger.

The trouble with this is, if we have the voting system as described by the member, it would be extraordinarily difficult to prevent large money candidates from always topping that list.

You cannot do this with the snap of a finger. You have to have public consultation. Why will you not agree with your leader?

[Business of Supply, December 3rd, 2014]

Mr. Speaker, the notion that the Liberal Party has taken a firm position not supporting proportional representation is news to many of us in the party. The idea that we have not been talking about this is news to many of us. As a former journalist, I have sat in on those conversations as a reporter covering those debates. Therefore, I am not sure where this idea of it being new to us comes from.

What is new today are the details of the proposition we are being asked to speak to and vote on in very detailed specifics, that being a list of 100. The details of the bill are not known until suddenly we ask questions in the House.

In the spirit of collaboration, I am curious as to whether anyone from the sponsoring party has approached the Liberal Party or the critic responsible and detailed exactly what the NDP means by this very specific proposal we are learning about today

[Business of Supply, December 3rd, 2014]

Mr. Speaker, as the member of Parliament for Trinity—Spadina, I am proud to represent the only provincial district in Ontario that voted for proportional representation in 2007. We had to fight the NDP very hard to get that put in place. However, the prevailing thought of the province was not to go in this direction because of the vagaries of the system.

I just listened to the presentation made by the hon. member and I understand there are more details to the proportional representation proposal than are currently in the motion in front of us. For example, there is the list of 100 people. However, if majority rule is the problem that prevents accurate reflection of the general population inside the House, how would a list that does not set aside specific seats for a region over a national interest, or women over men, or perhaps even a selection from our aboriginal first nations people to make ensure their voice, like in New Zealand, is protected and heard inside the House, solve that problem?

The members have all these details. They have not shared the details with the House, yet they have a very prescribed way of getting to a list of 100 people and allowing the majority to choose. How would they ensure that minorities would get a voice in the House if they are subjected to majority rule, once again, through the proposed system?

[Housing, December 3rd, 2014]

Mr. Speaker, earlier this week, the Minister of State for Social Development referenced a shelter in my riding, built by her department with federal funds. She blamed me for cost overruns approved by her department in advance.

What the minister did not tell the House was that the additional funds were needed to make the shelter accessible. In fact, what was required was an elevator. That was the reason it cost more.

These changes were required not only to meet new provincial guidelines but as I said, to make the shelter accessible for people with disabilities. That information was not in the Sun news story, so I guess it was not in her briefing notes.

On this the International Day of Persons with Disabilities does the minister really think that making housing accessible is an unacceptable cost overrun? Is it something that she defines as a waste of taxpayers' money?

On this day of all days, it is time for the minister to support making housing accessible and to stop defining reasonable accommodation and meeting provincial accessibility guidelines as a financial burden, and not something to be mocked.

Building good housing, accessible housing and affordable housing is her job. She should get to work.

[Lincoln Alexander Day, December 2nd, 2014]

Mr. Speaker, it is an honour to rise in the House today to speak with respect to Lincoln Alexander. While Hamilton may claim him as a son, I know that on Draper Street, in the riding I represent of Trinity—Spadina, there is a historic row of houses, one in which he was both born and raised when his family came to Toronto and he started his amazing life.

Draper Street has an annual event when the guards of Fort York march up to commemorate an old stand of houses that used to be military homes, but later became homes to Canada's railway workers. It was in this industry that many of Canada's early black settlers and early African-Canadians found work in Canada and in Toronto.

We have a proud history in the riding of leading a civil rights conversation with strong leaders. Lincoln Alexander's voice, his presence and his accomplishments are celebrated among a group of Torontonians we all remember. In holding this day for Lincoln Alexander and recognizing it nationally, we also stand and recognize the amazing contribution of people like Wilson Head and Bev Mascoll, one of the early black entrepreneurs in Toronto.

We talk about Stanley Grizzle, the first black judge who also came out of this neighbourhood in the Bathurst Street corridor that linked the railway workers' homes to the rail yards in the south end of the city, and in the riding that I represent.

We know that Harry Gairey, Sonny Atkinson, the Ellis family and the Padmore family were all part of this collection of one of the oldest communities in Toronto, a community that at one time produced a mayor of the city back in the 1890s and that has produced significant folks.

However, Lincoln Alexander holds a special spot in the city of Toronto. Although he represented and worked in Hamilton, his time in Toronto was also well celebrated and his presence in the city was one that made all of us better as citizens, as politicians and as actors in public life.

During his time at the legislature, I was a young reporter covering Queen's Park. I remember when his name was announced. I remember when he was invested in the Office of the Lieutenant Governor. I remember the focus he brought at a critical time in our city's history. When racial relations and tensions with police were running high, not only did he bring a strong and clear voice with respect to equity, inclusion and civil rights injustice, he also managed to build a bridge between the communities and the police service in our city. That was recognized with the honour that was bestowed upon him when he became an honorary police officer and fulfilled those duties. He was present while I was a member of the police services board in Toronto, and was present at many of our events.

He brought history to life. He brought the achievements of a community in Canada that can call itself black, that can refer to itself as African-Canadian and that can draw its roots from Nova Scotia, the United States, the Caribbean and from Africa. Lincoln was a leader among all of those men and women.

To honour him today, to stand and to recognize it nationally, is to do a service to what our country has always done well, which is to find a way to open the door to the next community coming in, the next person arriving, the next person looking for a job, and to ensure they get the dignity and the opportunity in the future that all of us deserve and that our families hope will be realized for all our children.

Lincoln Alexander was a strong voice in the civil rights movement of Toronto, of Hamilton and of our country. He was a strong presence in this chamber, in the legislature of Ontario, in the police service of Ontario and in the city of Hamilton. However, most important, for those of us who call Trinity—Spadina home, he was one of the early voices, one of the early leaders, and one of the great contributors to a much better Toronto on the way to becoming a much better Ontario and ultimately a much better Canada.

For that, we thank the member who has brought this motion forward. We look to the support of the House to celebrate this in solidarity with Lincoln Alexander.

I remember the last time we celebrated his presence on Draper Street. He pointed at the house where he was raised and then pointed across the street and said, “But that's the house I had my most fun in.” We never heard the end of that story, but if we did, we might not be honouring him today.

Lincoln Alexander is missed and he is celebrated. His gentle smile, his gentle ways and his fight for a better Canada will always be remembered fondly for those of us who call Toronto home and Canada home as well.

[Economic Action Plan 2014 Act, No. 2, December 2nd, 2014]

Mr. Speaker, I listened to the member opposite's long list of accomplishments the gas tax has brought her riding.

I am very proud to be a member of the party that introduced the gas tax. I remember, as a young reporter, covering that announcement by the then finance minister Paul Martin in Hamilton. I remember then following that announcement up to the Hill to cover the passage of the budget.

I recall distinctly that a party voted against it. She was a member of that party. I am curious as to why she voted against the gas tax when it has done so much good for the community she represents, and how she squares that with the comments she just has made.