House of Commons photoWon his last election, in 2011, with 56% of the vote.
National Defence June 11th, 2007
Mr. Speaker, we are in the process of re-equipping our military because it is needed, after 13 long years of Liberal government cuts. We needed to re-equip our military. We are in the process of doing just that, using open procedures that respect all the jurisdictions and accountability legislation.
Everything we are doing is in the best interests of Canadians and our military.
Mr. Speaker, I have two comments.
First, my colleague, the finance critic from the NDP, does not seem to understand the difference between tax credit and tax deduction. She said that tax credits result in no economic activity that help Canadians. She should know that a tax credit means if people have no tax liability, they actually get money. A tax deduction is money taken away. Tax credits actually invest money in the economy.
Second, I wish my colleague would be a little less insulting of Canadians. I look around this room and see my colleagues from York and PEI and my friends from Saskatoon, Quebec and Rimouski. There is not a member in the House who does not believe in supporting Canadians and helping kids. We just have different ways of getting there.
Conservatives believe in empowering families through lower taxes and economic growth and giving parents more choice in how they want to raise their kids. We have a different way of doing things and the NDP has a way of doing things. Neither she nor I care any less or more about kids than the other. I will not impugn her motives because her political ideology is different than mine.
I wish she would perhaps show a little more sophistication in terms of respecting the intelligence of Canadians as they choose which political party best represents the best way to get to what we all want, which is a strong Canada.
Asia-Pacific Gateway June 7th, 2007
Mr. Speaker, this week we read that the deputy leader of the Liberal Party, Elizabeth May, is calling for the federal government to withdraw the $1 billion in funding that our government has committed to the Asia-Pacific Gateway and corridors initiative.
This is one of the most important initiatives in British Columbia's history and it is crucial to addressing our infrastructure needs in western Canada. The policy proposed by Ms. May would jeopardize infrastructure plans in Vancouver, Surrey, Port Coquitlam, Winnipeg, Edmonton, Delta, Saskatoon, Banff, Richmond and Coquitlam.
This Conservative government backs the Asia-Pacific Gateway. We believe in creating Canadian jobs through world sales. We believe in opening new markets and opportunities for Canadians. We stand with the premiers of all four western provinces in support of the Asia-Pacific Gateway.
We want to ensure the Liberal leader will actually show some courage and speak out and tell Elizabeth May that she is wrong in jeopardizing $1 billion that this Conservative government has committed to western Canada for our economic future.
Budget Implementation Act, 2007 June 6th, 2007
Mr. Speaker, my colleague at the tail end of her speech mentioned that the federal government should be having strategic investments into projects that will have strong economic benefit. I agree with her.
For example, in this budget we have put forward $1 billion over eight years as recommended by the province of British Columbia for the Asia-Pacific gateway and corridors initiative. We are going to build $400 million for the south Fraser perimeter road, north Fraser perimeter road, and the Roberts Bank rail corridor.
We are putting new interchanges in place in Regina. We are improving access to the airport in Winnipeg, an announcement that is just down the road from where the member is. We are helping build a new multi-modal facility in Edmonton at 41st Avenue.
We are putting $1 billion in the Asia-Pacific gateway. It has a partnership between the federal government, the province of British Columbia and all western provinces, NDP, Conservative and Liberal premiers in all of western Canada. It is $1 billion. It is an incredible opportunity for Canada.
In the first century of this country we were an Atlantic trading country recognizing our ties to Europe and our opportunity to link Europe with the United States and the trade opportunities there. The Asia-Pacific gateway is about recognizing the trade opportunities between all of the Pacific Rim and Canada and through to the United States. It is a $1 billion.
The NDP premier in the member's province supports it. All of western Canada supports it. Why is she voting against the Asia-Pacific gateway and against the best interests of western Canada?
D-Day June 6th, 2007
Mr. Speaker, it was 63 years ago this morning that over 14,000 brave Canadian heroes landed on the beaches of Juno Beach in Normandy.
It was the most important seaborne invasion of all time, with the goal of gaining a landing in Nazi occupied Europe to begin the long campaign to free a continent of Nazi tyranny and begin down the road to victory and the end of the second world war.
Those brave soldiers came from across Canada. They came from farms, towns and cities. They were teachers, masons, police officers and carpenters. They came from all walks of life and all corners of Canada.
Great countries are made by citizens doing extraordinary things for the benefit of others. There is no more extraordinary thing than to serve one's country, to fight for freedom and to risk or lose one's life for others.
On this anniversary of D-Day, the turning point of the second world war, we thank our veterans of that great campaign. The world was forever changed for the better because of their courage, service and sacrifice. We will never forget.
Air Canada Public Participation Act May 28th, 2007
Mr. Speaker, I have a question for my colleague with regard to official languages. WestJet flies to Quebec City. WestJet flies to Moncton. Should WestJet, by law, have to abide by the Official Languages Act?
Business of Supply May 18th, 2007
Mr. Speaker, I have a question about gas prices and gas consumption and obviously, therefore, the consumption of fossil fuels and what that means for our environment. I hope the member can actually answer this question.
Maybe it is just the time year where it is that silly season part of politics where everyone seems to stand up and ask a question and everything has to be couched in political intrigue and “You guys are muzzled because the PMO says this and you guys failed”.
I want to try to have a conversation with someone who, in the past, I have respected for substantive interventions in the House. I know he supported the member for Etobicoke—Lakeshore when he ran for the leadership of the Liberal Party. During that leadership campaign, the member proposed the idea of considering increasing gas taxes, increasing the price on gasoline to drive down consumption as a way of reducing CO2 emissions and trying to do something for the environment. This is not an uncommon idea. Many people share this view. David Suzuki and others believe very strongly in increasing the cost of gasoline as an effort to reduce consumption and, therefore, take action with regard to the environment.
The NDP historically has held this view. I remember, for example, the member for Vancouver Centre in the previous Parliament voting against a motion that we put forward at the time to reduce gas taxes because she said that lowering gas taxes and gas prices would increase consumption which is bad for the environment.
As that has traditionally been the Liberal position, I have a question for the member. Does the member believe, as the member for Etobicoke—Lakeshore did and as the Liberals used to believe, that cutting gas taxes and lowering the price of gasoline is a bad idea because lowering gas prices will increase consumption and, therefore, it will be bad for the environment?
We seem to have duelling messages from the Liberals over the past number years. On the one hand they have said that we need to reduce CO2 emissions, that we need to reduce our carbon footprint on the world and that we need to preserve our fossil fuels but, on the other hand, we hear questions in the House from Liberals suggesting that we should cut gas taxes as a result of defending the interests of consumers.
It seems to me that they cannot have it both ways. The member has in the past, as I have said, supported the member for Etobicoke—Lakeshore in his idea of increasing the price of gasoline. It is not a heresy. A lot of people believe in that idea. It is not an irrational idea. I do not happen to believe in it but I want to know if my colleague believes in cutting gas taxes. Or, does he believe, as his choice for the Leader of the Liberal Party does, in increasing gas prices in order to reduce consumption?
Business of Supply May 16th, 2007
Mr. Chair, the money has been delivered but it is being delivered over a phase of time. John Furlong has not raised any of those concerns. These concerns perhaps are within the context of my colleague from Vancouver Centre.
All the plans that have been put in place by the government and, indeed, the ones that were originally put in place by the Liberals have been well received by VANOC, John Furlong, the premier, Sam Sullivan and all those involved in the games.
I do not know what concerns the member is raising. We know that everyone wants more money but the money we are delivering is more than enough to ensure these games will be a success. Frankly, this will be one of the most expensive games in the history--
Business of Supply May 16th, 2007
Mr. Chair, I do not agree. I have had countless meetings with Colin Hansen, the provincial minister responsible for the games, and with Premier Campbell and Carole Taylor, the provincial finance minister, and they have levelled no complaints. We have a great working relationship with John Furlong, who is the chair of the Olympic Games, the chair of VANOC. They are all very proud of the process that we have underway.
These games will be a success. They will be a success for the host first nations. Cultural communities have been engaged and they are involved. Youth have been engaged and they are involved. We are doing everything we can to ensure the games are a success.
The previous Liberal government had not put enough funding forward and Premier Campbell stepped forward and asked the federal government for an additional $55 million on the advice of John Furlong. This government, on top of the money that we had already committed, said that we would give them an additional $55 million above and beyond what was promised
These games will be a success and the member for Vancouver Centre will be proud.
Business of Supply May 16th, 2007
Mr. Chair, those responsible for the Olympic Games will respect both official languages from the beginning to the end of the 2010 games. Our government has made that commitment. We had even made that decision when the Liberals were still in government.
The host first nations have been incredibly cooperative and proud and, in fact, very anxious to get the planning of the games and the building of the infrastructure underway.
It is a great moment in Canada, not only for the lasting legacies of the games but when we have such diverse political entities in this country working together on the games, the federal government, municipal governments, host first nations and, as I said, even separatists, to ensure the games will be a success, this is a moment Canada cannot miss and, with this Conservative government, we will not miss that moment.