House of Commons photoWon his last election, in 2011, with 56% of the vote.
Question No. 175 April 28th, 2003
For the past five years: ( a ) what is the total amount of advertising spent by the Canada Deposit Insurance Corporation CDIC on an annual basis; ( b ) what contracts were entered into with advertisers; ( c ) what minister is responsible for the CDIC and was there any correspondence between the minister's office and the CDIC pertaining to the advertising; and ( d ) was Communication Canada involved in the decision to advertise CDIC services, please provide relevant information?
Airline Industry April 10th, 2003
Mr. Speaker, lowering taxes to get more people flying is not a bad precedent. It is actually a pretty good one that the government should consider.
The air industry needs leadership but instead of leadership it is getting muddle from this government. Yesterday the transport minister said:
We're well aware that traffic is down (but) with a bit of luck...people's confidence will come back....
Why does the government not take concrete steps toward lowering taxes, putting more money in people's pockets therefore getting more people in the air, rather than wishing and hoping for a little bit of luck to bail it out of its problems?
Airline Industry April 10th, 2003
Mr. Speaker, this past March, before the filing of creditor protection, Air Canada had a 10% drop in air traffic from last year. Since its recent creditor filing, SARS, the war in Iraq, gas prices and taxes, April's numbers are not likely to be that much better relative to last year's numbers for April.
The government cannot solve all the problems of Air Canada or the airline industry but it can stop contributing to the problem by lowering taxes and getting more people into the air.
Will the government eliminate the air tax, lower fuel taxes, lower airport rents or do any of these things to help get more people flying?
Food and Drugs Act April 9th, 2003
Madam Speaker, I wonder if my colleague from Nanaimo--Alberni could let the House know about the correspondence he has been getting on this issue, the volume and the kinds of concerns he has been hearing from Canadians.
Supply April 3rd, 2003
Madam Speaker, I appreciate the comments by my colleague, the member for West Vancouver—Sunshine Coast. In particular I wish he would highlight a concept.
As the former Speaker of the B.C. legislature, he understands well the difference between disagreeing with people and disagreeing with people in an irresponsible and destructive way. The member from Mississauga called the Americans bastards and the former communications director to the Prime Minister called President Bush a moron. Those kinds of comments are completely irresponsible. Reasonable and honest dissent in a diplomatic and healthy way is certainly appropriate between democratic nations that respect free speech. However that kind of destructive behaviour is completely intolerable.
I wonder if the member could briefly talk about our specific issue in British Columbia, the issue of softwood lumber, and how this is hardly a helping hand.
Airline Industry April 2nd, 2003
Mr. Speaker, we are holding up the bill because we do not want the tax cut, we want it eliminated completely, and the government does not seem to understand that.
It is one thing to say that the answer is not always to cut taxes, but the answer surely is not to raise taxes, which is all the government has done to the air industry year in and year out.
Given that the government was prepared to give tens of millions of dollars in corporate welfare to Air Canada, given that it had the cash on hand, why does it not take that cash and then transfer it to a broad based tax cut for the entire air industry on a level playing field? Why will the government not do that?
Airline Industry April 2nd, 2003
Mr. Speaker, yesterday the transport minister said that cabinet is “reviewing” the fees and taxes imposed on the air industry. The review is a waste of time, time that the air industry does not have.
The issue has been studied. The transport committee has done it and has recommended broad based tax relief. The Travel Industry Cost Coalition, the Air Transport Association and air carriers have all studied this and arrived at a fact, a fact that the transport minister has not seemed to grasp: that the air industry needs broad based tax relief, tax relief that the government does not have the courage to give it.
Why will the government not cut taxes across the board for the air industry and let the air industry fly?
Airline Industry April 1st, 2003
Mr. Speaker, it is actually a bit ironic and perhaps poetic justice that today is the one year anniversary of the introduction of the $24 air tax and this is what we see with Air Canada.
What the Minister of Transport could do, which would be progressive, would be to reduce fuel taxes, eliminate the air tax and deal with the airport rent issue. Nothing has happened for the air industry from this government except that it continually increases taxes and hammers it into the ground.
Will the transport minister agree today that his responsible role is to lower taxes so the air industry can fly, and to get off its back and stop treating the air industry like the cash cow it is not supposed to be?
Airline Industry April 1st, 2003
Mr. Speaker, Air Canada is filing for bankruptcy protection because it desperately needs to reduce its costs.
United Airlines, in a similar process in the United States, by May 1 will have a court imposed or negotiated solution for its financial crunch. American Airlines yesterday announced a $1.8 billion deal that will keep it flying. In both of these cases, these private sector companies reached their necessary agreements without government interference.
Will the Minister of Transport agree that offering any government assistance to Air Canada would be unfair to other airlines, and it would hurt taxpayers overall?
Criminal Code March 31st, 2003
moved for leave to introduce Bill C-424, an act to amend the Criminal Code (consecutive sentences).
Mr. Speaker, this bill is in response to the Inderjit Singh Reyat case, where somebody who was convicted of a violent crime did not receive consecutive sentencing, but rather received concurrent sentencing for being involved in the deaths of a number of people.
This bill calls for the changing of concurrent sentencing to consecutive sentencing for those who commit violent crimes, so that those who do commit violent crimes will be held accountable under law.
(Motions deemed adopted, bill read the first time and printed)