House of Commons photo

Crucial Fact

  • Her favourite word was money.

Last in Parliament October 2015, as Conservative MP for Calgary Nose Hill (Alberta)

Won her last election, in 2011, with 70% of the vote.

Statements in the House

Petitions February 28th, 1995

Mr. Speaker, in the last petition, 105 citizens of Calgary North protest the inclusion of sexual orientation as a prohibited ground of discrimination in the charter of rights.

I am pleased to say that I will be representing my constituents' views on these issues to this House over the coming months.

Petitions February 28th, 1995

Mr. Speaker, in the third petition citizens are saying no to spousal benefits being extended to same sex couples.

Petitions February 28th, 1995

Mr. Speaker, the second petition is from people in Calgary North. They ask that the government not change the Criminal Code to allow assisted suicide.

Petitions February 28th, 1995

Mr. Speaker, I have the honour of presenting four petitions today on behalf of the citizens in my riding of Calgary North.

The first petition is asking this government not to increase taxes. The citizens who signed this petition feel they are already overburdened with taxes and are asking that the burden not be increased.

Pensions Of Members February 27th, 1995

Mr. Speaker, we hear a lot of rhetoric from the competent members opposite about fairness and equity.

Will the Prime Minister explain to Canadians why there is one standard of fairness for Liberal members of Parliament and another for the rest of Canadians?

Pensions Of Members February 27th, 1995

Mr. Speaker, this afternoon in his budget speech the finance minister is sure to ask that we all make sacrifices for the good of the country. He will lecture Canadians on the need to make tough choices. Yet Liberals are providing themselves with pensions twice as rich as the best in the private sector. They will get their pensions at age 55 even though they want to raise the age limit to receive the Canada pension plan from 65 to 67.

Is the Prime Minister telling Canadians to do as I say and not as I do?

Social Services February 21st, 1995

Mr. Speaker, the finance minister should re-examine the presentation.

The government talks a lot about compassion.

Where is the compassion in eroding the sustainability of our social programs because this government cannot get a grip on its spending? What will happen to our social programs if the interest drain continues?

Social Services February 21st, 1995

Mr. Speaker, this year the Canadian government paid out about $43 billion in interest. Next year we will have to pay about $47 billion in interest. That means we will have $4 billion less to spend on social security next year than we had this year.

What does the finance minister intend to cut from spending so he can pay this extra interest on the debt he is building up?

Supply February 21st, 1995

Mr. Speaker, I would like to speak today as one of our party's critics on human resources development and social policy and particularly to address our motion contending that the government's 3 per cent of GDP deficit targets are totally inadequate. I would like to address it from the perspective of the impact of this policy on social programs in this country.

It was the Trudeau Liberal government of which the present Prime Minister was once a senior member and finance minister, which first sold Canadians on the myth that big governments can solve most of our problems. Government then designed program after program to take over some of our personal responsibilities and provide for our basic needs.

Government help and handouts are now regarded as a right. In fact, today when someone claims a right for something, he is probably asking for goods or help from the government. The pervasiveness of this attitude was demonstrated to me this December when, as a member of the Standing Committee on Human Resources Development, I attended hearings on the social reform proposals of the Minister of Human Resources Development.

Although very few Canadians were given the opportunity to address the committee, 159 advocates for special interest groups were paid almost $4 million taxpayer dollars to come and plead their right to continued or even increased public funding. This is funding that will have to be extracted from current and future fellow Canadians, from you and me and our children, in the form of higher taxes or debt.

Sadly, the pipe dream of big government as a solution to our problems has not only brought us close to bankruptcy, it has led to an abdication of personal responsibilities and has set Canadians against Canadians. Hard working Canadians are becoming increasingly incensed to have the fruits of their labour confiscated to fund an ever growing number of non-essential programs. Needy Canadians are told that they are entitled to more help from their fellow citizens and that they can rightly resent anyone whose hard work, risk taking or good fortune has provided them with a measure of wealth.

The problems we are facing today are not just the result of a lack of money, but are directly related to the role we expect government to play in our lives. We are now beginning to realize that many government services are dysfunctional, unaffordable and have a negative effect on self-reliance, independence, responsibility, personal dignity and the social fabric of our society.

For a quarter of a century Canadians have been encouraged to increasingly rely on the government, and they have done just that. A vast amount of our national wealth goes to pay for security measures. Fully one-half of all federal government spending is on social programs. Two-thirds of all federal government spending, after it pays its interest payments, is on social programs. Spending on social programs by all levels of government is about $155 billion every year. That is over 20 per cent of our country's entire income of $750 billion.

On top of that, Canadians spend a significant amount of their own personal resources on security measures. These include additional health insurance, savings for old age, post-secondary education and training, insurance against a whole host of unforeseen adversities, and personal savings.

Even if we stopped funding any of this social spending with borrowed money, we still would spend more than adequate amounts of our national wealth to achieve the level of security we need. Yet welfare state programs are paid for not only by heavy taxation but by borrowing from future generations.

The disastrous consequences of these Liberal policies are now threatening the very programs that Canadians have been encouraged to rely on to meet their security needs. Let me explain why.

In order to borrow, someone has to lend us money. When someone lends the Government of Canada money there has to be

something in it for them. That something is interest. The interest has to be paid every year until the money is returned. Our government has not been returning any borrowed money. Far from it. Instead, for 25 plus years in a row it has borrowed more and more money every single year on which it must pay more and more interest. Not only does the interest burden increase, it compounds.

Just think about the logic of what we have done. We have borrowed money to keep expensive, welfare state, give everybody a cheque programs afloat. Every dollar in interest paid on that borrowed money is a dollar that we cannot now spend on needy people in our country.

This year the Canadian government paid out $42.7 billion in interest. Just think for a moment how much security that $42.7 billion could have provided to the people of this country. Next year we will have to pay about $47 billion in interest. So next year we will have $4 billion less to spend on social security, and less the year after that, and even less the year after that until almost all our national wealth is consumed to service the debt that our reckless and incompetent political managers, mostly Liberals with help from so-called Conservatives, have saddled us with.

The tragedy is that it is not just us today who must face the huge drain of interest dollars endangering our future security. Shamefully, our children and our children's children will have to carry the burden of our government's lack of self-control. Their futures have been heavily mortgaged because governments were not willing to pay their own way.

For 15 months this Liberal government has allowed this incredible fiscal disaster to continue. In these 15 months it has borrowed another $61 billion. That means that every single month this government, this team which claims to be so competent, has overspent by $4 billion. Every month this government has put $4 billion more on your credit card and mine, Mr. Speaker. That is $137.93 for every single Canadian every month. That debt is the inheritance our children have to look forward to. And now the finance minister even wants to tax that.

With this kind of fiscal insanity on the record one would think this Liberal government would now be telling Canadians it has cleaned up its act, will be living within its means and has stopped the interest drain on our economy. Instead, what the government is telling us is so incredible that it has citizens across the country rising in outrage.

The Prime Minister and the finance minister say they intend to confiscate even more of our income for their own spending purposes. They also tell us with pride in their voices that they intend to continue to put us in the hole a minimum of $25 billion for every year we leave them in charge of our affairs. They refer to this incompetent management as good, honest government.

Our children will have to cough up in the neighbourhood of $8 billion every single year to pay for the spending spree of this government not to mention the $40-odd billion every single year they get to pay on the spending sprees indulged in by previous Liberal and Conservative governments. I expect our children will have quite a different name for this kind of management.

It is not hard to figure out that a dollar spent on interest is a dollar that cannot be spent on social programs. A dollar spent on interest is a dollar that cannot be used to help the poor and disadvantaged. A dollar spent on interest is a dollar that cannot be used by business to expand, to improve products, to take advantage of trade opportunities and most of all, to create real long term jobs for Canadians.

Members of this government make a big production about their commitment to helping people. They constantly wax eloquent about the virtues of fairness, equity and compassion.

I am willing to bet that every single one of these kind and caring Liberals will vote to put us and our children over $100 billion in the hole during their term in office. Every one of these Liberals will stand by and see an additional $8 billion plus sucked out of our social programs, sucked out of our job sector, sucked out of our future security over their term in office.

How fair is that to Canadians struggling to support themselves and their families? How equitable is it for us to spend today and hand the bill to tomorrow's citizens? Where is the compassion in eroding the sustainability of social programs because the government cannot get a grip on its appetite for borrowed money?

For 15 months Reformers in Parliament have steadfastly pressed for a change in direction and have kept the issues of our borrowing and our debt and the interest drain on our economy on the national agenda. Reformers are telling the Liberal government it is time to change direction. Canadians deserve better than to end up where the Liberals are taking us.

We need to downsize government, re-evaluate and restrict its functions, and stop living on borrowed money. We need to find better ways to effectively help those in need, ways that are affordable and encourage people to take responsibility for themselves, their families and those around them through communities, churches, schools, charities and other social groups. Public assistance should be reserved for those who need it most.

My colleagues and I in the Reform Party are doing our utmost to get the message of fiscal responsibility to those who sit across the floor of the House. Unfortunately as opposition we cannot bring about real change, a fact that is as frustrating for many Canadians as it is for me. That will not stop us from doing what we can to influence the government.

Today Reform has taken the unprecedented step of taking a government by the hand and showing it the way to a balanced budget within one term of office, within three years. I do not expect members opposite will be permitted to support such a common sense proposal, but I invite Canadians to continue to demand a return to fiscal sanity in the country.

Petitions February 15th, 1995

Madam Speaker, I am pleased to present a petition on behalf of constituents of Calgary North, praying that Parliament ensure that the present provisions of the Criminal Code of Canada prohibiting assisted suicide be enforced vigorously.

This petition is signed by more than 25 members of the Calgary North constituency.