House of Commons photo

Crucial Fact

  • His favourite word was billion.

Last in Parliament February 2017, as Liberal MP for Markham—Thornhill (Ontario)

Won his last election, in 2015, with 56% of the vote.

Statements in the House

Business of Supply September 28th, 2010

Madam Speaker, I have been in politics almost 10 years and never ever have I participated in such a ridiculous debate. It is ridiculous in the sense that the government is proposing that we go with ignorance over knowledge, ideology over reason. There are 355 organizations and individuals who seldom enter politics denouncing this move. The Conservatives talk about jail time when not one Canadian has ever gone to jail for not completing the census. The Liberal bill will remove that possibility even as a theory.

There are people from across the land in every kind of occupation and profession professing that this long form census data is crucial to our understanding of our country, whether we are in business, whether it is a provincial government, a municipal government or whatever. It makes absolutely no sense and the government keeps changing its arguments.

An hon. gentleman who actually worked with me as the deputy minister, Munir Sheikh, a great Canadian, a great public servant, had no option but to resign as chief statistician after his advice to the government was, to put it charitably, mischaracterized.

I will now talk a little bit about the economic angle, but I am just astounded as a Canadian in politics that this issue should ever have come to the floor of the House of Commons because it makes absolutely no sense. It is counter to what is good for Canada. The Conservatives have no arguments to the contrary, so I am a bit floored, I must admit.

Let me now turn to some more detail on the economic side. For example, we have Mark Carney, a highly respected Governor of the Bank of Canada, whose job it is to set interest rates and conduct monetary policy for the good of the Canadian economy. He himself has said that the absence of long form census data will impede his ability to conduct monetary policy for the good of the Canadian economy. To quote him, he said, “There is a non-trivial range of data that could be affected”. Then according to a Globe and Mail story, when asked which data could be affected, Mr. Carney said, “That's part of what we're going to have to work through. Obviously a series of surveys on the household side, and the potential implications for the labour force survey”.

Here is the man appointed by the Conservatives, and in this case I would say a very good appointment, to conduct the monetary policy of the nation saying that his job for the good of the Canadian economy will be negatively impacted by this ridiculous, stupid decision by the government to abandon the long form compulsory census. That is just the tip of the iceberg. We have 355 solid organizations confirming how ridiculous this move is.

Let me just say one thing about statistics. Those on the other side do not seem to understand the basic principle of statistics. We do not get more accurate information by increasing the numbers. It is not a question of how many respond; it is a question of which type of person responds. The experts are unanimous that there are certain classes of Canadian citizens, certain types of people, perhaps new Canadians because they have trouble with the language or poorer Canadians, who will not answer and therefore will be unrepresented. We could have 10 million Canadians answering, but if they are disproportionately of the, shall I say upper or middle class or parliamentarian types who are not in these negatively affected groups, we will get a disproportionate answer and we will not get accurate data. That is what all the statisticians are telling us. That is what the government either does not understand or chooses to ignore.

This affects not only the Bank of Canada but businesses that are making investments, such as a business wanting to set up a new Tim Hortons or a grocery store, they want to know where people live. These businesses are the backbone of our economy. However, they will no longer have accurate information in terms of demographics and where people live, the incomes of people and all of those things needed to conduct their business in an effective way. It is bad for business and bad for the Bank of Canada and the management of the Canadian economy.

I will give the House a few more quotes. The thing is beyond the pale. We really do not need more quotes because it is so obvious but since we are debating this issue I will read more quotes.

Craig Alexander, president of the Canadian Association for Business Economics and the chief economist at TD Bank, said, “...the census is the single most important piece of information we get.” They will no longer have it thanks to the anti-diluvium attitude of the Conservative government.

The Nunavut finance minister said:

We depend largely on information that they gather to help us shape our policies, programs that we deliver in Nunavut in areas such as the homeless issue, health, education.

Nunavut will no longer have this information.

The Association des statisticiens et statisticiennes du Québec, which has more than 110 professional statisticians in its ranks, is in favour of reinstating the mandatory long form questionnaire for the 2011 census.

The statisticians of Quebec are hardly a left-wing, subversive socialist gang who the government should be afraid of. These are people who do not usually get involved in politics and they are typical of those who are speaking out against this ridiculous decision on the long form census.

John Winter, president and CEO of the B.C. Chamber of Commerce, again not a socialist subversive to the best of my knowledge, said:

Having dependable and quality data which achieves a high response rate to questions covered by the long form is vital for business analysis and policy development. Businesses, regardless of size and sector, base their planning and decisions on dependable census data. This determines how they will develop initiatives and allocate resources to remain successful.

That goes back to my example with Tim Hortons.

Madam Speaker, I forgot to say that I will be sharing my time with the member for Mississauga—Streetsville.

I could go on forever with quotes but I will give the House just one more.

Marni Cappe, president of the Canadian Institute of Planners, said:

The mandatory framework of data collection under the current Census system provides a validity and comprehensiveness that is not likely able to be matched by a voluntary system....

I have been in politics almost 10 years and I have never seen a more ridiculous action taken by any government than this action on the long form census. It destroys the quality of data needed by businesses, by governments, by NGOs and by others to run our country effectively. They will be paying more money to get weaker data. The notion of people being sent to jail is totally ridiculous because no one has ever been sent to jail. The Liberal member's private member's bill would eliminate, even in theory, the possibility of jail time.

I see absolutely no reason for this and we on the Liberal side will work as hard as we can to get this motion through in order to block this anti-diluvium dinosaur move by the Conservative government.

Infrastructure September 28th, 2010

Mr. Speaker, the government's own report tells us that one-third of all projects will not be completed by December 31 when we will be into the dead of winter.

Therefore, municipalities across the land are into a bidding war for labour and materials, meaning higher costs on the backs of municipal taxpayers.

Rather than grant case by case extensions to its favourite towns, will the government, for once, act rationally and grant a six month extension to all municipalities today?

Infrastructure September 28th, 2010

Mr. Speaker, on one hand, the Conservatives are saying that they are going to arbitrarily cut funding on March 31; on the other hand, they are saying they will be fair. It would be fair to give an extension to the Pat Burns arena, to the 2-22 Ste-Catherine project in the Quartier des spectacles and to all the other threatened projects in Canada.

Why are they refusing to grant these extensions?

Infrastructure September 27th, 2010

Mr. Speaker, that is not an answer. Six weeks ago the town of Stanstead asked for a three month extension to complete the Pat Burns arena. As of today, Stanstead has received no answer.

If funding for the Pat Burns arena, announced by the Prime Minister himself, is in jeopardy, then how can Canadians believe any of the commitments made in today's report?

Infrastructure September 27th, 2010

Mr. Speaker, six weeks ago, the town of Stanstead asked for a three-month extension to complete the Pat Burns arena. As of today, Stanstead has received no answer.

How can the government continue to threaten communities like Stanstead, saying it will hold back the millions of dollars promised by the Prime Minister himself?

Government Programs September 23rd, 2010

Mr. Speaker, we are not calling for a penny of new stimulus, only that the government extend its arbitrary deadline and honour existing commitments to communities.

Right now Conservatives are shifting the burden to hard-pressed property taxpayers. When all municipalities across the land are subject to the same arbitrary deadline, we get a senseless bidding war for labour and materials that further raises the cost to taxpayers.

Will the minister announce today that he is extending his dumb deadline?

Government Programs September 23rd, 2010

Mr. Speaker, in communities like Lachute, there has been an escalating bidding war for labour and materials, all because of the Conservatives' arbitrary deadline.

Will the minister finally make amends, help out struggling communities and announce, today, that he will extend the deadline by at least six months?

Questions Passed as Orders for Returns September 22nd, 2010

With respect to the second year of the Treasury Board’s four-year cycle to review program spending and performance across the government and ensure value for money: (a) which 21 departments and agencies participated in the exercise and how much did each department or agency contribute towards the (i) $349 million identified for 2009-2010, (ii) $449 million identified for 2010–2011, (iii) $586 million identified for 2011–2012; and (b) for each of the participating departments and agencies, among what programs or services were the savings identified and in what amounts?

Government Advertising September 21st, 2010

Mr. Speaker, these Conservatives spent almost three times as much in advertising as the Liberals did in their last year in office. Why does he keep forgetting that point? And the ads do not work.

When asked, “Did you do anything as a result of seeing or hearing this ad?”, 93% of Canadians said no. The ads were so confusing that some respondents thought they were being told to wear hard hats at work. What more will it take to get these Conservatives to do the right thing and agree to arm's-length oversight of government advertising?

Government Advertising September 21st, 2010

Mr. Speaker, this government spent $130 million on its advertising campaign. The worst part is that such advertising is ineffective. Surveys show that 60% of respondents refused to give the messages a positive grade. When will the government allow its advertising spending to be studied by an independent third party?