House of Commons photo

Crucial Fact

  • His favourite word was riding.

Last in Parliament October 2019, as Conservative MP for Stormont—Dundas—South Glengarry (Ontario)

Won his last election, in 2015, with 51% of the vote.

Statements in the House

Business of Supply April 27th, 2009

Mr. Speaker, I will be sharing my time with the hon. member for Thornhill.

I am happy to have this chance to reply to the motion proposed by the hon. member. It alleges that the government has failed to take all necessary steps to ensure that our American friends understand the critical importance of our shared border to trade and economic security and emphasizes that the government must ensure that the Canada-U.S. border remains secure and efficient and is managed in a way that reconciles a great variety of personal, commercial and national security interests.

Let me be the first today to reject the allegation that the government has not done everything it could to ensure that the American government understands we are determined to guarantee the security and accessibility of the border. Today’s debate will show in fact that a host of extensive bilateral discussions are currently underway about our shared border and everything leads us to believe that they will continue to progress.

The Canada Border Services Agency, the CBSA, manages the flow of travellers and goods across the border in order to protect the sovereignty, security, health and prosperity of Canada. Of course, it is a bit more complicated than that. Every year, the CBSA manages the flow of almost 100 million people across the border and clears about 13 million commercial shipments and more than 32 million courier packages through customs, worth a total of about $400 billion.

Although most of this work is done at 20 main land-border crossings, 14 international airports, three mail centres and four large marine container terminals, the CBSA provides services at 1,200 different locations all across the country, including 119 border crossings and hundreds of other land terminals, small airports and vessel reporting stations.

The CBSA is also responsible for enforcing the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act, which means it handles thousands of claims for refugee status, detains people who could pose a threat to Canada, and removes people who are inadmissible to Canada. It must be aware of thousands of lookouts for people of interest, contraband and dangerous goods. It also handles cases covered by security certificates, which are an essential method of protecting Canada against terrorist attacks.

The CBSA also administers our trade laws and agreements, enforces trade remedies that help protect Canadian industry, and collects duties and taxes on imported goods. All these responsibilities make the CBSA's work very complicated and wide-ranging.

Over the past two decades, under both Liberal and Conservative governments, Canada has embraced free trade as a driver of economic prosperity and gained a reputation as a welcoming country for those seeking a better life. Attention at the border has gradually shifted from collecting import duties to emerging challenges related to contraband, illegal migration, health and safety, criminal and terrorist threats, and facilitating cross-border trade and commerce, the lifeblood of our economy.

Canada is a trading country and our ability to sustain and enhance our international trade capacity is key to our continued prosperity. However, let it be clear: security is job one at the border.

The events of 9/11, Canada's subsequent and continuing mission in Afghanistan, and the arrest and prosecution of suspected terrorists within our own borders have all sharpened our focus on issues of public safety and national security. We know that Canada is not immune from a terrorist attack and that we must constantly be on guard. We recognize our critical role in contributing to the security of Americans. As our hon. Prime Minister has stated, “There is no such thing as a threat to the national security of the United States that does not represent a direct threat to Canada”.

The CBSA works within a robust and sophisticated border management framework that employs a scientific approach to risk assessment and detection. CBSA risk management is multilayered based on pre-approval programs to facilitate low-risk people and goods, advance information on people and goods coming to Canada, and risk-based intelligence. The idea is to push the border out to the extent possible to extend the enforcement of border policy to ports of departure around the world rather than strictly at points of arrival here in Canada.

This concept of pushing the border out is important. It is crucial that we try to discharge our security responsibilities not only where they will have the maximum impact from a security perspective but also with the minimum degree of intrusion or cost to business or individuals. The CBSA mandate contains parallel obligations to Canadians: secure the border and facilitate travel and trade. For just over five years, the agency has addressed these commitments simultaneously and with equal resolve. This is no small challenge, but the CBSA has done an excellent job.

The CBSA has made enormous progress in integrating parts of the old customs, immigration and agriculture inspection organizations amid an unprecedented intensification of the security environment. In response to its dual mandate, the CBSA has introduced a number of innovative programs, which another speaker will outline a little later.

We have generally kept up with the United States at all stages of our high priority technology, systems and programs. We have implemented complementary strategies and maintained excellent inter-agency cooperation at all levels.

However, more remains to be done, together, to ensure that the 49th parallel continues to be a secure, efficient gateway for travellers and goods moving in both directions.

The CBSA now has a lot of human resources working on intelligence-related activities. It is setting new priorities and installing new systems that will help it focus its efforts better. The CBSA must also determine where it could invest abroad over the next five years. Its success will depend increasingly on its ability to gather foreign intelligence and forward that intelligence as quickly as possible to decision-makers.

In closing, it is the opinion of this government, gathered in direct consultation with our American colleagues, that Canada has taken all reasonable measures to ensure that the White House and Congress understand the importance of our shared border to trade and economic security in both Canada and the United States. Aside from words, both governments understand and appreciate the CBSA's actions on the ground toward a safe and secure border.

As we manage the flow of people and goods, we gain a better understanding of not only trade and travel patterns but criminal tendencies as well. This, in turn, allows us to improve our programs and policies in defence of public safety. Our ultimate objective is border safety and security that is sustainable in the context of our civil liberties and economic prosperity.

Government Response to Petitions June 20th, 2008

Mr. Speaker, pursuant to Standing Order 36(8) I have the honour to table, in both official languages, the government's response to seven petitions.

Points of Order June 20th, 2008

Mr. Speaker, I can apologize for misleading the House because it has been brought to my attention that in my absence, while I was gone one weekend on a Friday, apparently the House leader did answer two questions regarding northern Ontario, so I do apologize to the House for misleading it.

Economic Development June 20th, 2008

Mr. Speaker, it is interesting that this is the very first question, since I have been here on this side of the House in over two years, that has ever been posed about the situation in northern Ontario. It is very interesting that it should come now.

The Conservative government is committed to the development of northern Ontario, unlike the leader of the Liberal Party who said during the leadership campaign that people should move to where the jobs were.

It was this government that announced $45 million in long term stable funding for FedNor and over $60 million to support projects in northern Ontario. This Conservative government also signed a historic agreement with the U.S. to settle the softwood lumber dispute that significantly helped northern Ontario.

What are they going to do after they have the carbon tax?

Canadian Wheat Board June 20th, 2008

Mr. Speaker, I again thank the member for his question but I will answer it with a question. This is a question from the constituents of Malpeque.

I made a couple of visits to wonderful P.E.I. and the following is the feedback I received. The constituents of Malpeque want to know why their member has asked 32 questions on the Wheat Board and only 2 questions on any issue that has anything to do with P.E.I.

Canadian Wheat Board June 20th, 2008

Mr. Speaker, I thank the hon. member for the question but I am a little confused.

During our throne speech, when we reiterated support for duel marketing for the Wheat Board, the member voted for it. Now he is voting against freedom of choice for the farmers. We cannot figure it out.

At the agriculture committee the other day, he voted to do a study on the carbon tax and on the devastating damages it would do to agriculture. Now he is supporting the carbon tax.

I would like that question answered.

Agriculture June 18th, 2008

Mr. Speaker, I recently had the pleasure of making several visits to P.E.I. to meet with farmers from all across the Island.

Island farmers told me how frustrated they were with the member for Malpeque. Instead of talking about the issues important to his constituents, all the member seems to want to talk about is the Canadian Wheat Board.

Farmers in P.E.I. talked to me about potatoes, livestock and our government's strong support for supply management. Not one farmer asked me about the Canadian Wheat Board, which only exists in western Canada.

I promised these farmers that since their member of Parliament was absent on the issues important to them, I would raise the issues directly with the minister.

The people of P.E.I. need their representatives to work tirelessly in bringing their concerns to Ottawa. The residents of Malpeque deserve better. They deserve an MP who understands their priorities and brings their interests to Ottawa. In the next election, they will demand better. They will demand a Conservative member of Parliament.

Points of Order June 17th, 2008

Mr. Speaker, I do not think there is any question that this is a point of debate and not a point of order.

I might just quote this:

That the Standing Committee on Agriculture and Agri-Food study the effects of a carbon tax and any other broad based environmental tax and ensure that Canadian farmers are not saddled with a carbon tax which would further increase their input costs and hurt their competitiveness.

That is what the member opposite voted for.

Carbon Tax Proposal June 17th, 2008

Mr. Speaker, the carbon tax being proposed by the Leader of the Opposition is going to drive Canadian farmers out of business. Canadian farmers will not be able to compete with their competitors when they are paying more to fill the fuel tanks on their tractors, paying more to run their combines and paying more to ship their goods to market.

Today the Conservative MPs at the agriculture committee voted to protect Canadian farmers from the devastating effects of a carbon tax.

The bad news for Canadian farmers is that one of the Liberal MPs voted in favour of the carbon tax. The bad news for the Leader of the Opposition is that three Liberals, his own agriculture critic, the member for Mississauga—Erindale and the member for Brant, all voted against the carbon tax. It seems the Liberal leader is having some trouble convincing his own MPs to buy into his tax trick.

All Canadians can rest assured that this Conservative government will not stand by and watch the Liberal leader get away with his carbon tax trick.

Committees of the House June 10th, 2008

Mr. Speaker, I listened intently to the member's speech. I also listened to his answer to the first question he was asked by my hon. colleague. Quite frankly, he did not answer the question.

People talk about the military going through a decade of darkness under the former Liberal government. Agriculture went through a decade of darkness with the Liberal government as well. Tobacco growers went through a decade of darkness.

I want to ask the member directly, once and for all, what did the member's government do for 13 years while tobacco farmers were in terrible trouble? I would like a direct answer, blow by blow. What did the Liberal government do for those people who suffered for 13 long years?