House of Commons photoWon his last election, in 2015, with 50% of the vote.
Petitions June 8th, 2016
Mr. Speaker, I have a very complex petition here. It is regarding Bill C-14 to legalize euthanasia and assisted suicide, which the government has brought forward.
The petitioners state that the killing of people is not a genuine health care solution. The undersigned residents of Canada ask the House of Commons to vote against Bill C-14 and instead to invoke the charter's notwithstanding clause which allows parliamentarians to ignore bad judicial decisions.
Business of Supply June 2nd, 2016
Mr. Speaker, it is unbelievable. We just heard from the parliamentary secretary how he does not believe that the Canadian people should have a choice, but actually that the parties should have the choice in how Canadians elect their representative.
Earlier on, we had the Prime Minister reference that the reason he does not want to actually go to a referendum is because he would not likely get the result that he wanted. Then today in question period, we actually had the minister refer to the people who want to have a referendum as being narrow-minded. That is a disservice to Canadians. That is a disservice to everyone who sits in this great House.
Why is it important that we have a referendum in Canada and allow the people to have a say on all of the options that are available for them in how they select their members of Parliament?
Sydenham District Hospital May 19th, 2016
Mr. Speaker, the people of Wallaceburg in my riding of Lambton—Kent—Middlesex have enjoyed outstanding health care in their community. The Sydenham District Hospital and its emergency department have served Wallaceburg, Walpole Island First Nation, and our area for almost 60 years.
Recently, the Sydenham emergency department was recognized by the Ontario Ministry of Health and Long-Term Care for its outstanding performance by achieving the greatest reduction in wait times in the province for small rural hospitals.
I invite everyone in this great House of Commons to join me in congratulating the emergency department physicians, nurses, and support staff at Sydenham District Hospital. We are thankful for their amazing service.
Privilege May 19th, 2016
Real change, Mr. Speaker.
On October 22, 2014, when there was the attack in Parliament, people said, “Not in Canada. This cannot happen in Canada”. The same sentiment is happening right now. How can this happen in Canada, for our Prime Minister to discredit this country with his authority?
Privilege May 19th, 2016
Mr. Speaker, I want to thank my colleague for the amazing work that he did when he was minister of veterans affairs, in terms of the respect that our country has for our veterans.
We have heard from the RCMP about the abuse that has happened. Let me just say one thing. This morning we were at an event that was covered by representatives from around the world. At one time our Prime Minister said, “Canadians know Canada is broken. It's time for real change. It's time to do things differently”. Well, he just did. I had people from different parts of the world this morning ask me what happened to Canada yesterday.
Privilege May 19th, 2016
Mr. Speaker, what happened was the Prime Minister either did not know about the process, or I believe just had the arrogance to say “I'll fix this” because they were not moving fast enough according to his agenda, and he just strong-armed our whip to get him up there. Unfortunately, because of the lack of process that he followed—after all, he has to know it, he is the Prime Minister of this country—he got into the issue of abusing an individual. There is absolutely no justification for that, and we cannot in this place minimize the situation that happened here yesterday, brought on by the Prime Minister of Canada.
Privilege May 19th, 2016
Mr. Speaker, I suspect the member would not have had the opportunity to ask that question.
If the member was in the workplace as an employer, and he walked in and grabbed an employee within that business, hauled the person out, turned around and went back, and maybe accidentally knocked one of the ladies around, I can almost guarantee he would not have the privilege he has in this place of showing up for work the next day.
Privilege May 19th, 2016
Mr. Speaker, I have to say that until today, every time I stand in the House, it has been an honour to talk about bills or a matter that moves this country and my riding of Lambton—Kent—Middlesex forward.
For 20 years, I was involved in municipal government. I started out in planning, became a councillor, and then reeve and mayor for many of those years. Then I had the distinct pleasure and most distinguished honour of being elected to this place to represent the constituents of my riding of Lambton—Kent—Middlesex. I have done so for a little over 10 years now, which I guess says a bit about how old I am. However, I can say that in that time and in my career as a business person, I have never in my life even attempted to visualize the abuse of an institution that we saw yesterday, not by a member of Parliament but by the distinguished head, the Prime Minister, of what I call this great country of Canada.
Every one of us will stand and say what a privilege it is to be here, and it is. I take everyone at his or her word. Yesterday, I saw the Prime Minister get up out of his seat for some reason and storm across the aisle. I also watched the video clips last night and I have to say the clips did not show the anger in his face. I have absolutely no idea why a Prime Minister would get angry just because people had not yet taken their seats for a vote on cutting off the time for debate. However, he did. He stormed across the aisle, grabbed the Conservative whip, and dragged him away. Then something must have occurred, because the Prime Minister went back.
Not only did he abuse his authority, not only did he grab the Conservative whip and pull him away, but he went back and used coarse language in the House, which is not acceptable. Nobody on the other side seems to want to talk about it. I have listened to two members across the aisle today who actually tried to minimize what the Prime Minister, their leader, did. It will not get minimized and it will not go away until he does something to make sure there are consequences for what he did not only to our NDP colleague but to the members of the House and to regain the respect of Canadians across the country which was lost yesterday.
I am trying to figure it out. He was like an angry, spoiled adolescent who did not get his way, so he got up and went across the aisle. He instantly apologized. He made the apology not after the first time he crossed the aisle, not after he crossed the aisle the second time, but he made it after the House erupted and he maybe figured out that he had better say something. Then this morning, in a written statement, and my colleague from Portage—Lisgar said, “I understand, not likely a great night,” we have a written apology.
We learn from history. We learn from apologies. He is a great orator. He is a drama teacher. That is his background. He is a good actor.
When a member stands up in this place, we have to take the member at his word. In 2012, the Prime Minister, then a member of Parliament, made a comment to a colleague of mine. I was in the House. He used unparliamentary language. He hurled a comment at our environment minister. We were in government at the time. He said, “Oh, you piece of” and I cannot say the word in this House, but he did. Our Prime Minister, unapologetic about the spirit that moved him, said, “I called him something that was fundamentally biodegradable, compostable and good for the environment.”
Now our colleagues across the way are on their knees saying, “Oh, please, take him at his word. What he said was compassionate and he meant it.” In families and in business, and with people I deal with every day, I take people at their word when they follow their word. I do not take people at their word because they are good speakers, good orators, or a drama teacher before becoming the Prime Minister.
He has brought the House to the point where we have no trust in the government. The government almost lost a vote on Monday, and for almost the first time in the history of Canada, it took the Speaker to break the vote, because people did not show up for work.
We got elected to show up for work. I guess the government was embarrassed because it could not get its members here, so the government drafted Motion No. 6. First of all, the government took away the calendar. What does that mean to the folks who are listening? It means the government can bring bills forward and we will have no time to prepare to debate them. It took away the calendar that indicates which bill is going to be on the docket, and we would have no time to prepare for it. We have a dictator who created a motion that more or less says, “We are going to tell you when you are going to speak, what you are going to speak on, and by the way, we will tell you what the bill might be, just before we introduce it.” That is not democracy.
Democratic reform is a bit of a joke after the actions we have just seen. The Prime Minister has taken away the ability of the opposition to oppose. That is what we do. That is our mandate.
I am going to be looking for the consequences that Canadians are asking me about. The question of privilege will be going to PROC, which is rigged up and has a majority of Liberal members on it, but what sort of consequences will there be for our Prime Minister?
Petitions May 17th, 2016
Mr. Speaker, I have the honour to present a petition with a number of names of residents from my constituency on it, which basically talks about the significance of life and how important it is until natural death.
The petitioners are calling upon the House of Commons and Parliament to continue to prohibit euthanasia and assisted suicide.
Ethics May 12th, 2016
Mr. Speaker, the issue is not Ms. McFall's knowledge of the industry. It is the fact that she practically owns the industry. She claimed, as my colleague quoted, “my family’s business is pretty relevant to (the portfolio) so I think that’s part of how I got the job”.
She got the job because of her family and her company, and apparently the minister, in all due respect, did not see the conflict. However, I have to ask this of the minister. Why hire a chief of staff who has such a direct conflict of interest?