House of Commons photo

Crucial Fact

  • His favourite word was fact.

Last in Parliament March 2011, as Conservative MP for Kootenay—Columbia (B.C.)

Won his last election, in 2008, with 60% of the vote.

Statements in the House

Committees of the House May 31st, 2007

Mr. Speaker, unfortunately, as the member would know, I am unfamiliar with the specific comments made by the current Minister of Industry or the context in which they were made.

I can advise him though that what I said previously still stands. We understand the difference between water and water. Water in a pipeline, or in a bulk export or in a diversion is a totally different legal issue than water in a bottle, which is transported back and forth across the border. They are completely separate. The commodity may be the same, but the form it is in makes all the difference in the world.

There is no point in repeating what I have already said. The Government of Canada has no intention of entering into any agreement. I cannot imagine that the Liberals, on their worst day, would even contemplate such a thing. This is a problem that simply does not exist.

Committees of the House May 31st, 2007

Mr. Speaker, I will make every effort to accept the Liberal member's comments in a positive vein. The difficulty being that to gather first ministers together is not an incidental issue. We are talking about many tonnes of carbon in the air from planes that will be flying them and their advisers and I do not know how many tens of thousands of dollars to actually convene a meeting about something that is pure piffle by the NDP. I do not think the member really expects that.

However, I point out that the Prime Minister has an outstanding relationship with all the premiers of this great nation, no matter what their political stripe is. He and they recognize the importance of the fact that we as a government and they as respectively responsible for their provincial legislatures have the same responsibility to their people in their particular constituencies.

Committees of the House May 31st, 2007

Mr. Speaker, I categorically reject the proposition that Canadians are worse off now than they were previously. I absolutely reject that. That is absolutely stupid.

Maybe I can make clear my reference to black helicopters, which is to conspiracy theories that black helicopters are hovering around all over the place. Conspiracy theories seem to be what fuel the paranoia of that member and his fellow colleagues. There is no conspiracy.

The Government of Canada has made it crystal clear. There is no intention whatsoever to enter into bulk water exports. To go past that point and say if we did, we would end up with it being covered under NAFTA is a leap into an abyss that simply does not exist. There is no intention to enter into any kind of agreement.

As much as I have significant differences between our party, my position and the position of the Liberals, I do not believe for a split second that any national party, with the good of Canadians in mind and having the responsibility of being the government, would ever enter into an agreement like that.

They are talking about fixing something that does not exist all on a whim of this conspiracy idea, and what happens? We open up NAFTA and create all kinds of problems for over half a trillion dollars worth of trade annually. It is absolute lunacy.

Committees of the House May 31st, 2007

Mr. Speaker, I came into the House today prepared to do battle, as it were, with the NDP and the idiocy of this particular motion that says that there is a problem and that we must address the problem.

There is no problem. The Government of Canada has absolutely no intention of entering into any agreement. As I said previously, through the International Boundary Waters Treaty Act, the Government of Canada prohibits the bulk removal of water from Canadian boundary water basins, including for the purpose of export.

The federal government's prohibition is both environmentally sound and consistent with Canada's international trade obligations. It builds on sound water management principles and the need to protect the integrity of Canada's watersheds.

The International Joint Commission has commended the Government of Canada for its action to prohibit bulk water removals.

In the case of the North American Free Trade Agreement, Canada, the United States and Mexico clarified, through a joint statement issued on December 2, 1993, that nothing in the agreement would oblige any NAFTA party to either exploit its water for commercial use or to begin exporting water in any form.

Water in its natural state is not a good and hence not subject to trade agreements. Tariff schedules do not define what is a good. They only determine what tariff applies to water that has been transformed into a good, that is bottled water.

The NAFTA has made all three partners more competitive by providing their firms with preferential access to markets and more than 431 million consumers.

An increasingly integrated market has stimulated capital flows, promoted the spread of technology and contributed to increasing productivity, higher wages, lower prices and more choices for consumers.

Canada's merchandise trade with its NAFTA partners has increased 122% since 1993, reaching $596.7 billion in 2006, accounting for 82.6% of Canada's total merchandise exports. The NAFTA has also had a positive impact on services and investment flows among the three countries.

Again I say to the NDP, on the question as to whether the Government of Canada is preparing to enter into negotiations to export its water into the United States, no. The Government of Canada has no intention of entering into negotiations on bulk water exports.

The NDP members subscribe to the wonderful theories about black helicopters and conspiracies because of a meeting that occurred somewhere. I think it was in Calgary or some such place. Of all things, the meeting was held behind closed doors and the press was not invited. People actually had a meeting to discuss bringing together the positive forces between Canada, the United States and Mexico under the NAFTA agreement and to bring together the synergism that occurs between those three nations, the economic, security and other issues that are common to those three nations. The NDP members continue to call this a conspiracy because, of all things, the meetings were held behind closed doors. I guess it just comes from the NDP members not having the capacity to ever form the Government of Canada.

The Liberals being the former government and our party being the current government, I do recognize that there are certain restrictions and constraints on any leader of any party that has the most members in the House. I also recognize that there are certain constrictions relating to the cabinet that he or she has chosen to form and the bureaucracy, the Privy Council Office and the Prime Minister's Office. However, that does not preclude any government from making choices as it sees fit to give direction. However, nonetheless, it is constrained by the terms and conditions of the agreements and the international treaties under which previous governments have entered.

Under those constraints, as I have already read, bulk water is not a commodity. It is not a merchandise.

I find it so unfortunate that the sincere and well-meaning people in my constituency, who I have listened to and talked to, are convinced that just because people make speeches, like some of the NDP speeches today in this House of Commons, no matter how badly informed those members are or how devoid of anything approaching fact they are, somehow we must listen.

In the speech by the member who spoke just before the last NDP member, her major concern was the fact that an American think tank said something, whatever it was that was said, and therefore it must be fact. That absolutely underscores my proposition that the conspiracy theory that the NDP are propagating here today is founded on absolutely nothing except fabrications around black helicopters.

If we were to follow, and heaven forbid that we would, what the NDP members are talking about, do they actually believe that when the NAFTA is opened for this issue the other parties that are covered under NAFTA would not open it up for one, two, five, fifty, one hundred or five thousand other amendments that they would want? Of course they would.

The worst thing in the world that could happen with the NAFTA, particularly frivolously, as this motion is, would be to open it up for a frivolous, vexatious, useless, needless motion like this and then open up the entire floodgate of debate, discussion and renegotiation and put us back into morass.

Whether we like it or not, the fact is that up to 80% of Canada's exports and imports occur under NAFTA. Whether we like that or we do not like that, that is a fact. We are talking about over half a trillion dollars a year of imports and exports. These people, under this motion, would open up a half a trillion dollars a year of trade among our sovereign nations and all the jobs that means and all the issues that means to our joint societies over this frivolous, needless, useless fabrication of an idea.

There is no problem. I would suggest that they might want to take a look at Yogi Berra's axiom, which is, “If it ain't broke, don't fix it”.

Committees of the House May 31st, 2007

Mr. Speaker, one of the concerns that I have, as a long sitting member of this House, is that when people read Hansard or when they might be watching these proceedings on television, they might presume that the people in this House are basing some of their comments on facts. Unfortunately, that is simply not true of the interventions by NDP members. They are feeding the black helicopter crowd. They are distorting the facts. As a matter of fact, they are not even coming close to the facts as they actually exist.

I would like to read into the record that through the International Boundary Waters Treaty Act, the Government of Canada prohibits the bulk removal of water from the Canadian boundary water basins, including for the purpose of export.

The federal government's prohibition is both environmentally sound and consistent with Canada's international trade obligations. It builds on sound water management principles and the need to protect the integrity of Canada's watersheds.

The IJC has commended the Government of Canada for its actions to prohibit bulk water removals.

In the case of NAFTA, Canada, the United States and Mexico clarified, through a joint statement issued on December 2, 1993, that nothing in the agreement would oblige any NAFTA party to either exploit its water for commercial use, or to begin exporting water in any form.

The difficulty is that the NDP does not understand that there is an agreement to open, as this motion proposes, the--

Museums May 18th, 2007

Mr. Speaker, May 18 is International Museum Day.

This year's theme, “Museums and Universal Heritage”, provides an appropriate opportunity to reflect on the diverse heritage preserved and displayed in museums across Canada. Canada and its museums recognize the shared responsibility among the nations of the world to protect our common patrimony.

Canada's museums, whether small local community museums or large national institutions, have played and will continue to play an essential role in the life of this country.

Our government is committed to meaningful ongoing support and partnership. Our first priority must be to our federal museums that maintain the story of Canada as a country. In fact, our commitment to Canada's museums totals $267 million.

Cultural expression is vital to our nationhood and a thriving cultural sector is an essential part of strengthening Canada's quality of life.

Business of Supply May 16th, 2007

Mr. Chair, I rise on a point of order regarding relevancy. I believe that the member would want to ask questions that relate directly to the minister's portfolio.

Business of Supply May 16th, 2007

Mr. Chair, again, as I did with my friend from Fredericton, who is an experienced member and this member is not; nonetheless, I believe the Chair would want the member to be asking questions that are relevant to the minister's budget.

Business of Supply May 16th, 2007

Mr. Chair, I rise on a point of order. I know these proceedings are new to some of us, although my friend and I have been in the House a fair length of time. He might want to reflect on the fact that his questions really should be directed at the minister to do with her estimates, not the broad questions that he has been putting.

Canadian Heritage April 27th, 2007

Mr. Speaker, that is a very interesting question from the NDP. I rather suspect he does not like the idea of public-private partnerships.

I point him to what has happened with respect to the museum in Winnipeg, where the Prime Minister very proudly joined together public-private partnerships to expand the capacity of our government to honour the people who should be honoured through our museums policies.