House of Commons photo

Crucial Fact

  • His favourite word was debate.

Last in Parliament October 2015, as Conservative MP for South Shore—St. Margaret's (Nova Scotia)

Won his last election, in 2011, with 43% of the vote.

Statements in the House

Nova Scotia Floods April 2nd, 2003

Mr. Speaker, we have all seen the images on TV of the catastrophic flooding in Nova Scotia. In my riding of South Shore, two people have lost their lives. Businesses are destroyed, homes are ruined and 18 bridges across Nova Scotia are closed. This is the worst flooding Nova Scotia has seen in over 50 years.

Nova Scotians have always been there for our neighbours. Through ice storms, floods and even on 9/11 we stood shoulder to shoulder with other Canadians to help. This time we need some help and I would like to know if the Minister of National Defence, responsible for emergency measures, has contingency plans to help Nova Scotians, and exactly how he plans to help.

This is one time Nova Scotians need to hear from their federal government.

Criminal Code April 1st, 2003

Mr. Speaker, members of the Progressive Conservative Party will be voting no to this motion.

Criminal Code April 1st, 2003

Mr. Speaker, the members of the Progressive Conservative Party will be voting no to this motion.

Canadian Forces April 1st, 2003

Mr. Speaker, the Minister of National Defence has stated that members of Canada's armed forces in Iraq “are in a situation of combat around them”. Members of the Canadian Forces and their families are not eligible for veterans' benefits unless cabinet passes an order in council and yet Parliament is kept in the dark.

Would the Minister of National Defence assure the House that such an order has been tabled to protect our military personnel in Iraq?

Budget Implementation Act, 2003 April 1st, 2003

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to be recognized to speak on Bill C-28, the budget implementation bill.

I listened to the comments of the members who spoke previous to me. Since there was no opportunity for questions and comments, I will add a few comments during my speech to the budget.

It was interesting to hear the member from the Northwest Territories speak about diamonds. It is an extremely new and valuable industry for Canada. Without question, I think there is probably as much opportunity or more opportunity in the diamond industry today than probably any other sector of the economy in Canada. It holds great promise for northern Canada, our aboriginal peoples and the newcomers to the north.

However an issue about diamonds, which the member did not bring up, is the fact that the diamond industry has flourished basically on its own. The government has ignored it. Perhaps that is to the benefit of the industry. Most things that the government pays too much attention to become overburdened with red tape.

If the member is really interested in the diamond industry, there are a couple of things she could pursue, and I would suggest she does. First, traditionally it has taken four and a half years to permit a new mine, which is ridiculous and entirely too long. Understand that these mines are environmentally friendly. They do not use a lot of noxious chemicals and they are in isolated areas. In some instances that process has been shortened to two years. With an industry that does not pollute, mines should receive environmental permits within a 12 month period, and everybody would be happy with the process.

Second, the government has ignored for so long the cutting and polishing industry. Finally we have a fledgling industry in the NWT in Yellowknife and in Edmonton. We should get rid of the excise tax. This tax is no longer relevant on manufactured jewellery and stones in Canada. It is time to get rid of the excise tax. If the government really wants to encourage an industry, then it has to do something about the tax system that holds that industry back. If the member would like to work on those issues, I am sure she would get some benefit and gain for her constituents.

The budget will be known as the Liberal spending budget of billions of dollars that Canadian taxpayers will be paying for a great many years.

What is in Bill C-28 is almost as noticeable as what is not in the bill. The Alliance member who spoke previous to me said that it was a shotgun approach. Those are exactly the same words I intended to use. It is a shotgun approach where a person has a shotgun with a load of No 8 shot, stands back about 25 yards points at the target and hits just about everything on that target. What is hit on the target is important. However what is even more important is what has not been hit on this target.

Our trading relationship with the United States has not been hit on the government target. It has been ignored. For example, again a member speaking to this budget bill mentioned the Canadian Food Inspection Agency. What has been the response from the CFIA on the American bioterrorism bill? Where are we in this country with north-south trade?

I will tell the House where we are with north-south trade after the actions of the government in recent weeks. We are in serious trouble with it. We are also in serious trouble in lack of response and lack of infrastructure to deal directly with the bioterrorism bill.

The basis of the American bioterrorism bill is to ensure food quality and food safety of all food products entering the United States. Part of the bill would mean that any exporter in Canada would have to give 12 hours' notice. There are all kinds of products that come out of Canada without 12 hours' or 24 hours' notice. The majority of Canadian products are on less than 12 or 24 hours' notice.

Fish products that come out of southwestern Nova Scotia from the South shore are about six hours from the Canadian border. They cross on the ferry in Digby, which is two hours from Calais and the American border. Fresh products destined for New York or Boston markets are expected to be there on same day delivery. Exporters cannot afford to have a 24 hour, 36 hour, 72 hour delay or whatever it may be. That delay is there now.

The best thing that the budget could have done would have been to shore up and guarantee our continued trade and therefore our continued prosperity with our major trading partners.

Let us take one example out of the budget which is the roughly $68 million which was voted for the gun control bill. The Liberals continually call it the gun control bill. It is not a gun control bill. It is for a registry that has milked money from Canadian taxpayers and if this bill passes through the Senate it will continue to milk money for generations and it will never stop.

It is even more interesting what the present and former ministers of finance are saying about this. The former minister of finance, when he was minister of finance, thought this was fine. It was okay to hide money from the Canadian public. It was okay to take money that was supposed to be in the main estimates and put it in the supplementary estimates. It was okay to move money from department to department through the Treasury Board. It was okay to hide the truth from Canadians.

Now, that same former minister of finance is saying that all members of cabinet must bear responsibility and that he is prepared to accept his share. That is a big statement to spend $68 million of taxpayers' money and $800 million in total, soon to swell to $1.2 billion, soon to become even more swollen to $1.4 billion, $1.6 billion, $1.8 billion, $2 billion and on into perpetuity.

What else did the former minister of finance say? He said that the cost overruns were revealed to Parliament. That would be incorrect. The cost overruns were not revealed to Parliament. Parliament found out about them.

He said further that what we must get the report the minister commissioned and w must ensure this kind of thing never happens again. Well, it happened on that former finance minister's watch. That is every bit a juvenile response to an excessive amount of overspending under the former finance minister's watch as the juvenile response that the present Minister of Finance has given to a similar issue dealing with Canadian security.

All of a sudden the present Minister of Finance is interested in talking about a perimeter with the United States for trade that would protect the Canadian economy in years to come. The Progressive Conservative Party has always supported a perimeter for trade. We think it is a smart idea. How much money, of the billions spent in the last budget, went into looking at a safe perimeter for trade and safety for the people of North America, Canadians, Americans and Mexicans? Zero.

I appreciate having the opportunity to speak to the bill and I am sure that there are many other members who will want to.

Airline Industry March 31st, 2003

Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Minister of Transport.

Later today the Department of Transport will announce the Government of Canada's bail out package for Air Canada. Could the minister tell the House whether his department has conducted any analysis at all of the impact of that aid package on regional and discount carriers? If so, will he table that analysis in the House? Or is this information too sensitive for Canadian taxpayers? Perhaps, like the Minister of National Defence, he is consulting his historians. I would not mind having an answer. I am sure the House would appreciate one too.

Perth--Middlesex March 28th, 2003

Mr. Speaker, the constituents of Perth—Middlesex have no representation in the House.

The Stratford Festival in Perth--Middlesex is the largest theatre festival in Canada and is of great importance to the local economy, drawing more 600,000 tourists each year. Many of these tourists are Americans and many will be deterred from attending the festival this season owing to border delays and government anti-American rhetoric.

Would the Prime Minister inform the House when an election will be called in Perth--Middlesex so those people can have representation in this place?

Iraq March 28th, 2003

Mr. Speaker, the Progressive Conservative Party has laid out a four point plan for the government to follow in the war on Iraq. It is time for Canada to ensure that the United Nations gives itself the mandate to lead reconstruction efforts in Iraq.

The Prime Minister should instruct our diplomats around the world to forge a consensus that would allow members of the Security Council to draft and adopt the necessary resolution to authorize the UN to coordinate reconstruction efforts.

In addition to the financial contributions to humanitarian aid announced the day before yesterday, Canada should immediately dispatch a field hospital to Iraq to help deal with the mounting civilian and military casualties.

In addition to this and in addition to our contribution to fighting the war on terrorism, our ships in the Persian Gulf should be tasked with providing safe passage to ships containing humanitarian supplies through the gulf to Iraqi ports.

Iraq March 27th, 2003

Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Prime Minister.

The Prime Minister's rhetoric aside, he knows the United Nations cannot coordinate efforts to rebuild Iraq without a Security Council resolution that authorizes such actions.

Will he commit today to instructing Canada's diplomats to work toward the necessary international consensus that would allow the Security Council to draft and adopt that resolution?

He says he will answer if Canada's phone rings. Why will he not ensure Canada is the one making the calls?

Assisted Human Reproduction Act March 26th, 2003

Mr. Speaker, members of the Progressive Conservative Party will be voting yes with members for Richmond—Arthabaska, Fundy—Royal and South Shore voting no.