House of Commons photo

Track James

Your Say

Elsewhere

Crucial Fact

  • His favourite word is ukraine.

Conservative MP for Selkirk—Interlake—Eastman (Manitoba)

Won his last election, in 2021, with 57% of the vote.

Statements in the House

Devils Lake April 28th, 2006

Mr. Speaker, I want to congratulate the Prime Minister for improving relations with our closest neighbour, and successfully concluding a deal on softwood lumber. It is good to see that our Prime Minister and this government can deal with our southern neighbours after the Liberals spent 13 years destroying our relations with the Americans.

This bodes well for all the other issues on which we have to work with the Americans.

This spring Manitobans are once again faced with uncertainty about the protection of Lake Winnipeg due to the Devils Lake diversion. We are forced, once again, to deal with this issue despite claims made last year by the former Liberal government that it had signed a fictitious agreement to provide a permanent filter to protect Manitoba's waters.

This week I hosted a meeting with three of our ministers, municipalities surrounding Lake Winnipeg and the commercial fishing industry. We have to start focusing on the science and develop an ongoing respectful dialogue between all the jurisdictions affected.

Everyone is well aware that this issue is one of many that is of great importance to both our nations. I am confident that this Conservative government and our Prime Minister will be able to keep working constructively with the U.S., as demonstrated yesterday.

Federal Accountability Act April 25th, 2006

Mr. Speaker, my friend from the Liberal Party in his intervention reminded us of some of the discussions that happened at committee. I would like to remind him that although the Liberals began making steps forward on some of the issues around accountability, they did not go far enough. This is why we have brought forward the federal accountability act that I am so proud to endorse on this side of the House.

We have to remember that events happened in the last government, the Liberal ad scam for example, that required us to toughen up the rules and the way we do business as politicians, the way we do business as government. We need to make sure that we bring about the changes Canadians wanted when they voted on January 23.

Does my colleague agree that the accountability act that we began debating this morning will achieve the results that are so desperately needed to make sure that Canadians have faith in government and the people that they elect to the House of Commons and to fulfill the aspirations that Canadians have of us?

Federal Accountability Act April 25th, 2006

Mr. Speaker, I thank the Parliamentary Secretary to the President of the Treasury Board for his hard work and the effort that he has put into the accountability act, ensuring we have good whistleblower protection. The accountability that Canadians are looking for is going to be brought into place and it is so desperately needed following the scandal we went through in the last number of years.

One thing my constituents ask me is whether our accountability act will ensure that something like the sponsorship program and the scandal that surrounded it will never happen again.

Could the parliamentary secretary to go into some detail about this and talk about how our bill, with the support of the members of the House of Commons, will bring about the accountability that Canadians so desperately need to ensure that a program like the sponsorship scandal can never be abused again?

Government Appointments April 24th, 2006

Mr. Speaker, the Liberal Party named Glen Murray to its party's renewal commission, but Glen Murray is currently serving as the chair of the national round table on the environment and economy. Government appointees are not allowed to engage in partisan activities. After initially defending their decision, the Liberals eventually pulled Mr. Murray off the commission.

Could the government House leader assure the House that all government appointees will follow the rules?

Resumption of debate on Address in Reply April 11th, 2006

Mr. Speaker, I recognize that the hon. member has been a long-time member of the Standing Committee on Agriculture and Agri-Food. He served for a number of years as its Chair and has the passion for agriculture that is so desperately needed in this place, especially with the crisis we are facing today.

Would the hon. member care to comment on that great crisis we are facing today, in that the CAIS program designed by the former government has not met the needs and expectations of farmers across this country from one end to the other? There are very few commodities for which this program has worked to their benefit.

Would the hon. member comment on the CAIS program? What adaptations do we have to make to that program in the interim? Would the member also look at the long term vision as to what we need to do in the industry to meet the needs of this crisis and set our farmers on a solid footing in the hopefully not too distant future?

RESUMPTION OF DEBATE ON ADDRESS IN REPLY April 10th, 2006

Mr. Speaker, I want to say yes, we are bringing in a GST tax cut that is going to benefit all Canadians, including the 30% of Canadians who do not pay income tax and would never see the benefit of an income tax cut. The only way they are ever going to see tax relief is through a cut in consumption taxes. That is exactly why we are going ahead with the GST cut. This was a recommendation that actually came from the National Anti-Poverty Organization, and it is one that we are glad to have in our throne speech and will be moving ahead in the next budget.

RESUMPTION OF DEBATE ON ADDRESS IN REPLY April 10th, 2006

Mr. Speaker, I just love that our Liberal colleagues across the way seem to have a memory of only 13 years.

When I became involved in farming back in 1982 at the tender age of 17 and took out my first loans, the government of the day was Pierre Elliott Trudeau's Liberals. If I recall, my interest rate at that time was 24%. That government was driving the country into the ground. We had huge deficits in place and the national debt just ballooned under the Trudeau Liberals. We had eight years as a government, during the nineties, to start to turn the page. When paying 20% and inheriting the huge debt and the bad management of the Trudeau Liberals, we never had a chance to really get after the debt. However we were able to start the right initiatives and put in place the right programs that put the country back on the right track.

I love the analogy. We had two people by the names of Michael Wilson and Don Manzankowski who went out and planted a beautiful garden and the Liberals just came along and picked all the flowers. Sure, the country is in good fiscal shape but it is in good fiscal shape because of the initiatives that were started by the government from 1984 to 1993. The first time I was able to vote was in 1984 for the Conservatives, to give the Liberals the boot and bring in some good government. I am glad to be standing here as a Conservative and glad that we will be inheriting an economy that is robust but one that we will continue to keep on the right track.

RESUMPTION OF DEBATE ON ADDRESS IN REPLY April 10th, 2006

Mr. Speaker, first, I would again like to thank my constituents of Selkirk—Interlake for putting their trust in me one more time in this fine House and representing their views on an ongoing basis.

I am proud to speak to our new government's Speech from the Throne. As a father of three young daughters, I want to speak to the government's strong commitment to the well-being of children and families, a commitment that we are proud to advance through our proposed new choice in child care plan.

My wife, Kelly, and I have used many forms of child care over the years and participated very actively in our local community child care program. My wife served as director and president of our community child care centre and we have benefited from the professionals who work there.

As a rural farm family we also have relied on other forms of child care, including private care, family and friends, to help us raise our children and ensure a safe and healthy environment for our children to grow up in. So I know as a father how difficult it can sometimes be to fill all our child care needs as a family and as a community.

I represent a very rural riding in Manitoba with many towns spread out over a large area and with many families living on farms and in very remote areas. I knew very quickly that the former government's late conversion and promised child care system would not work for my constituents in Selkirk—Interlake. Many of my constituents live too far from towns and day care centres to benefit from the kind of day care that the Liberal government had promised would not work in Selkirk—Interlake.

Our new plan for child care will support families by helping parents to balance their work and family life. We all recognize that strong families are indispensable to children's good health and social well-being. This applies to families of whatever composition, two parent or single parent families, and whether they are paid in the labour force or raising kids, or are raising kids at homes while they are farming. All parents of young children will benefit from our child care plan because it is universal and designed to fit each family's unique needs and desires.

Mr. Speaker, I forgot to say that I will be splitting my time today with the hon. member for Souris—Moose Mountain.

This government's approach addresses all the necessary components of a successful child care strategy. We will support parents in their child care choices and we will work with employers and communities to create new child care spaces. Our plan is grounded in this government's understanding that parents know best when it comes to raising their children and creating strong families. We believe this approach is one in keeping with Canadian values.

The choice in child care allowance set out in the Speech from the Throne clearly reflects this understanding. This allowance is about choice and respect for all Canadians. It is based on the principle that government should support parents in their child care choices. It also recognizes that parents know best what their family needs.

As members of the House are well aware, Canadian parents face a diverse work environment. Not everyone is working nine to five, Monday to Friday. Parents work in the evenings, on weekends and at home. For Canadians who work on farms or in the fisheries, what they do is the core of who they are. Every day is spent balancing the demands of family with their work. The Canadian family today needs flexibility and innovative responses from this government to meet their needs.

Our choice in child care allowance also takes into account that nine to five child care facilities may not be a viable option for many families, including the approximately one-third of Canadians who live in small towns and rural communities without ready access to day care facilities.

The allowance recognizes that many Canadian parents continue to find ways to stay at home to care for their preschoolers themselves. In fact, almost half of all young children are cared for by a mother or father at home.

The choice in child care allowance gives these families options that they might not otherwise have. For parents who stay at home, the allowance will mean that they have the extra resources to draw upon when they need occasional or part time child care. For low income families especially, the allowance will make an important contribution to helping parents provide their young children with the kind of care they choose, whether it is centre based or a different type of child care.

In keeping with Canadian values, this non-discriminatory universal initiative treats all families with young children equally, regardless of income, where they live or whether the parents choose to work or stay at home.

Starting in July 2006, $1,200 per year will go directly to parents for each child under the age of six. An estimated 2.1 million preschoolers and their families will benefit from this allowance. To help ensure that Canadian families get the greatest possible benefit from the allowance, it will be taxable in the hands of the spouse with the lowest income.

We see the new allowance as a complementary addition to the various income supports that the government already provides to families with children, including stay at home parents and those who are working. These supports include the Canada child tax benefit, the national child benefit supplement, the child care expense deduction, extended parental leave and the Canada learning bond.

As I noted earlier, our child care plan will also create new child care spaces. Starting in 2007 we will invest $250 million a year in incentives for employers, non-profit organizations and communities to create new child care spaces. We estimate that these new measures will create 125,000 new child care spaces over the next five years.

We will be talking to businesses, non-profit employers and communities, in addition to the provinces and territories, to ensure we get this initiative right. We know that our key to success is to ensure flexibility of design. Our goal is to meet the needs of all Canadian parents, regardless of whether they live in a city or a rural community, and whatever their hours of work might be, which may not fit the nine to five mould.

This initiative will complement the roles of partners, such as provincial and territorial governments, by helping to create new child care spaces that are so desperately needed.

We also believe that employers will benefit substantially from this initiative by creating child care spaces for employees at their place of work. Many studies have shown that supports, such as workplace child care, can actually decrease workers' absenteeism by reducing employees' anxieties. Parents know their children are close by and being well take care of, giving parents peace of mind. Employers in turn are rewarded with increased productivity in the workplace.

I also want to mention that while the previous government's plan only amounted to about $700 annually per child care space in the province of Manitoba in increased subsidies, our plan will deliver $1,200 per year to all children and spend an additional $250 million a year to create 125,000 new child care spaces. That is $500 more per space being made available by the present government and that is for every child under six years of age, not just the ones currently in child care spaces across Manitoba. Our plan delivers substantially more to all Canadian parents.

To sum up, our plan is one that recognizes the diversity of Canadian families' needs and preferences. It does so by providing a universal benefit that parents can use as they see fit toward the kind of care they choose for their children. Ours is a plan that will create new child care spaces that fit the wide-ranging needs of families across the country, and we will do it in a way that benefits all families in every part of the country.

This is a plan that responds, above all, to the choice in child care that Canadians want. I am confident that we will see the benefits in our children's future development, health and social well-being, and in stronger families that are the sure foundation of our nation.

After 13 years of being told about Liberal grand designs for a national day care program, parents were left with nothing more than promises. On January 23, Canadians voted for a government so committed to child care that it made it one of its top five priorities. Our government is committing over $10 billion to assist parents with their child care needs, more than twice as much money as the previous Liberal program promised but not delivered. This money will help parents, giving them real choices in child care and support investments in the creation of child care spaces.

The Speech from the Throne promised a choice in child care plan because it is the right thing for Canadians families.

As the government, our responsibility is to lend a helping hand to ensure that Canadian families have meaningful choices in child care and to support them in whatever child care choice suits them best. This is also our responsibility as a society. I call upon my hon. colleagues to support the government in this most worthwhile initiative.

Federalism April 7th, 2006

Mr. Speaker, this week we have once again witnessed members of the Liberal Party, including the member for Malpeque, and the member for Eglinton—Lawrence who supposedly aspires to lead his party, display arrogant views on the role of federalism Quebec.

Even the deputy leader of the opposition has tried to distance herself from these comments.

After the Liberals' sponsorship program led to a public inquiry that investigated in part the Liberals' abuse of trust and public money, the Liberal Party continues with tired rhetoric and harmful antics.

Justice Gomery noted that key members of the Liberal Party put their partisan interests ahead of the interests of federalism. He found that such attitudes are “difficult to reconcile with basic democratic values”.

While Liberals continue to display arrogance and disregard, this Conservative government is moving ahead on an agenda of respect for federalism and fairness for all provinces, including Quebec.

Agriculture April 6th, 2006

Mr. Chair, I want to congratulate you on your new promotion. You are going to do a great job.

Since this is my first time to rise in the 39th Parliament, I want to thank the great people of Selkirk--Interlake for putting their faith in me one more time.

Agriculture is extremely important to my riding. There are over 5,000 farm families in Selkirk--Interlake. I understand this agriculture crisis all too well. I am a farmer. My parents are farmers. My brothers and their families are farmers. I hope that my children will have a career in farming as well. My daughters are very passionate about agriculture and are thinking about studying agriculture and coming back to the family farm. I want to make sure they have that opportunity. The way things were going under the Liberal government, I was not sure that was going to happen. Now I see there is some hope for the future because the new Conservative government is bringing in policies that mean there will be a long term, prosperous outlook.

Since I was elected in 2004, it has been a familiar occurrence in this place to have late night debates on the future of agriculture and the issues facing us, such as BSE, agriculture income, avian flu, and the list just seems to go on and on. We know there is a problem, but finally we have a Minister of Agriculture who has taken the time to be here with us all night. He is a minister who understands the problems and is going to bring in policies and the changes to make sure that we do have that prosperous, long term outlook.

I also want to thank the Prime Minister who took the time to be here and address the committee, to talk about the problem of agriculture and his vision of agriculture, where we need to be going down the road to make sure that there is long term sustainability. The Prime Minister and the Minister of Agriculture have been very open to talking with members of the caucus, to sitting down with the parliamentary secretaries, with the ag committee members and with members from caucus here who have a great deal of knowledge in agriculture. They have been talking about the future, the problems and the possible solutions that we can bring forward.

We have heard a lot tonight about the farm safety net programs that are in place today. Farmers in Selkirk--Interlake and across Manitoba and Canada absolutely hate the CAIS program. It has not worked. The only people I get phone calls from who seem to enjoy it are the accountants. It is way too complicated. We have to move forward and find a new program that is a lot easier to administrate, that can be done at the farm and that is a lot more responsive to the needs of farmers.

This government has responded very quickly. There was money that had been budgeted by the last Liberal government, but for whatever reason it had not been sent out. Finally when we came power, that three-quarters of a billion dollars was sent out to farmers in an expeditious manner. It is getting out there right now as we speak. Another $500 million per year over the next five years will also be going out to ease the pain on the family farms, but there is no doubt that that still is not be enough. We have to look at other ways to restructure the industry.

The biofuel strategy is one which a lot of us are getting excited about. There are great opportunities in the biofuel industries. We need to use those competitive advantages. We know that the WTO is important. We have to have a successful negotiation if we are going to address the needs of agriculture. We have to have a balanced approach that takes into consideration the protection of our supply managed industries but also makes sure that we free up markets for the other 80% of agriculture in this country. Ninety per cent of farmers in Canada are dependent upon grains and oilseeds and the markets for beef and pork. They need a world global market. We have to address that.

This government will address those issues. We are going to make sure that the regulatory impediments are removed so that we continue to advance the agriculture industry. I look forward to the future as the new government and the great new Minister of Agriculture move forward in addressing the problems facing our farm families.

Mr. Chair, I would ask for the consent of the House to waive my question time so that my colleague from Leeds--Grenville could have a chance to speak on issues facing the farmers in his area of Ontario.