House of Commons photo

Crucial Fact

  • Her favourite word was going.

Last in Parliament April 2025, as Conservative MP for Elgin—Middlesex—London (Ontario)

Won her last election, in 2021, with 50% of the vote.

Statements in the House

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1 May 6th, 2021

Unfortunately Ontario continues to see lockdowns, and people are pointing fingers. I will be honest, if we knew there were vaccines, if we knew it was safe for Canadians to get back to work and for children to go back to school, if we knew things would recover at a quicker pace, then I think we would have a lot more faith. That is why the Canada recovery benefit is very important. I do appreciate the extension of it.

This is where I want to get into CEBA loans. This where I want to change where we are going. I had recently asked the parliamentary secretary to the government House leader about these types of things. The government improved the Canada emergency business account. It went from $40,000 to $60,000, allowing business owners to keep up to $20,000. There have been some changes to that, such as repayment of loans and a variety of things.

My concern today is for those entrepreneurs who have been working to start new businesses. In my riding of Elgin—Middlesex—London, a number of businesses have remained on the line of whether they will fail or make it through is incredible challenge. It is an extremely difficult for them. When they call my office, I refer them to the Elgin Business Resource Centre, or the Enterprise Centre, or their banks. I suggest a variety of different things. However, when they are not eligible for these programs, the answer remains no.

We know that a lot of these programs have a list of restrictions. I did get a message back from the office of the minister for small business minister to inform me they had an appeal process for CEBA. It was supposed to be rolled out for people who were denied that assistance, but there still is no appeals process. Shortly, the government will have something so if people want to know why their applications were denied, they might be able to find out.

Those are some of the issues that I continue to have. I have to wonder why the government would not have put something like that in there, knowing that small mistakes could be made. One of my constituents was denied the assistance because there was a reversal on his business account number. He had to reapply and he continued to be denied. To me, that is a very simple slip-up.

However, when people are feeling choked out because of we are going through COVID-19 and the fact that they have to revert to some of these restrictions, something as simple as a transit number on banking information could get transposed, something that we could all switch so quickly and the government does not have a mechanism to deal with that. It is very concerning.

I will talk about a few more businesses.

In the community of Dutton, Margaret Perry opened up a place called the Daily Grind Cafe and Gift Emporium. Unfortunately Margaret opened her business in December 2019, and did not qualify for any of the COVID relief programs.

We have Angela Player, and Angela will do sensationally one day, I have had what she has to offer. She has a business called From the Vines. She is unable to show an up to 20% decrease in her revenues. Angela has invested over $60,000 into her business, but her business has never had that normal period for comparison purposes. I know Angela's business, From the Vines, will make it, but the COVID-19 pandemic has been the biggest barrier for her and there are no programs to assist her. Nobody is there to help her. Her hands are tied. When I referred her to some of these smaller organizations that did get the federal funding, because of the eligibility requirements, they would not assist her.

I think of someone like Craig Voakes. Craig owns what is called the Squad Box in St. Thomas. It is a business built around providing pre and post-game nutrition, hydration and recovery products to hockey, soccer and baseball teams.

As a parent, I am one of those crazy moms. I am on the sidelines, cheering along. I think Craig sees people like me as a perfect person to make a business around. A lot of us will give to our children. We want to ensure they have great opportunities, but our children are not playing hockey, soccer or any of these indoor sports right now. For somebody like Craig, whose entire business is built around that, he does not have the opportunity. As well, Craig started his business in December 2020.

Then there is Purely Wicked. If people come into the city of St. Thomas, I tell them to go to Purely Wicked. It is a fun place and it has so many great little things.

Kim, who owns Purely Wicked, now employs two people. It started it in 2019. She had nothing to which she could compare her information. It is exactly same thing for Shawn Devrie at Given Shop. Some of the six or seven different businesses I am talking about are within half a kilometre, so we are looking at storefront after storefront that may have to close because there just have not been any opportunities.

Finally, I want to end with Karen Nixon. She has worked extremely hard. Before she had her children, she was working three jobs in the physical health field. When I saw that, I knew she would make it. Years ago, she and her husband made a business plan. They worked with F45 Training, which has a way of building its business case. However, what happened to Karen was similar to everyone else. Karen had started her business and would run it while she continued to work. She was laid off because she was in physical health field and there was no business for her.

Last summer, at seven o'clock, each and every, in the morning, people would work out in our backyard because she needed to run her business. That was a year ago. She still cannot open her business today. Therefore, I think of people like Karen and Gary, who I know have given their entire lives and all their savings to their businesses and they have been left without.

I have so much more to add to this, but my biggest concern with this budget is it seems to touch on so many things. It is unfocused and just throws money everywhere, but it does not give direct money for programs to help entrepreneurs and small business owners, the people who create jobs and are the engine of our economy.

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1 May 6th, 2021

Madam Speaker, my hon. colleague from St. Albert—Edmonton gave us so much information, and I think we have all learned from it. If I add what I heard from him to what I have to say, we will have a fulsome speech, because like him, I want to talk about individuals. I will get to that.

I am giving my speech from the riding of Elgin—Middlesex—London, and to begin, I want to talk about families, individuals and businesses. We know they are all going through a very difficult time, and I do not think there is a member of Parliament who has not heard the challenges. We have all heard extraordinarily heart-wrenching stories, and we want to make Canada a better place.

I am going to start with some of the positives. I have heard a lot of people say that we are being negative about this, but let us be honest: Last year, if it were not for the opposition parties, there would not have been a wage subsidy to keep businesses afloat. The initial wage subsidy program was 10%, and it was increased later on after pressure from a lot of people on my side, my Conservative colleagues who were small business owners and accountants, and from other colleagues who sit in the other opposition benches. The wage subsidy program is something I can support in this budget.

We know people are continuing to struggle to keep their businesses open. We are hearing a lot of information on this from the CFIB, the St. Thomas & District Chamber of Commerce, in my area, and a variety of other sources. They are indicating the difficulties that many businesses are having. In my local economy, 17% of businesses did better during COVID; however, we have to look at those that did worse. I therefore support the wage subsidy, as having this bridge so we can continue to work out of this crisis is absolutely what we need to do.

The same thing goes for the rent extension. It is another program that had to be tweaked and changed. Again, opposition parties, in particular the official opposition, worked to ensure this it was a good program. I want the government to know that when it comes forward with something, it is not the only one to have great ideas. I can say that all colleagues have brought forward some very good ideas that were adopted by the government in the early days of the pandemic.

There is also the Canada recovery caregiving benefit. Unfortunately, I see that some of my neighbours are still having—

Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1 May 6th, 2021

Madam Speaker, one of my friends said that was probably the longest 20 minutes they have ever spent, but I thank the member for bringing that forward.

I want to ask a question for this member specifically, because I know he thoroughly knows what is going on in this debate. One thing that is really missing in this is anything that is for new business owners. I have a list of new businesses that started operating, a lot of them at the end of 2019, that are folding right now. The owners have not been able to find any supports at the provincial, federal or municipal governments because everything is not taking into consideration prior to the COVID pandemic.

What is the government going to do to help all of those flailing business owners who just do not have the eligibility requirements that the current government has put forward?

Business of Supply May 4th, 2021

Mr. Speaker, I know the member works very hard when it comes to violence against women and sexual harassment. However, I am really concerned that the higher ups, the people in the PMO and the defence minister, did not recognize there was such a problem.

I am looking at this and I am concerned. The minister and I have both looked at everything on the status of women and we know that it is report after report. Today, we are talking about the government providing another report in response. Will another report do the job?

Second. obviously the Prime Minister and the defence minister are reaching out to the minister on this issue. Did she ask about what they would do better and about a follow up? How did the Prime Minister and the Minister of National Defence talk to her about this and how did they approach what has just happened in the Canadian Armed Forces under their watch?

National Defence May 4th, 2021

Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister has nowhere to shift the blame on this total failure. He continues to claim he knew nothing of the allegations, but his defence minister knew, the defence ombudsman knew, his chief of staff knew, Elder Marques knew and the former chief of the Privy Council knew.

How can the Prime Minister claim all these people knew the details of the allegation but he was left in the dark?

National Defence May 4th, 2021

Mr. Speaker, on Sunday, the Minister of Defence said that the nature of the complaint ”does not matter”. When the general is in charge of Operation Honour, it matters. When he appoints a head of HR with so many sexual misconduct allegations against him that he is known as the “Mulligan Man”, it matters. When someone is a woman serving her country, it matters.

Could the man, who is the Minister of National Defence, tell me why he thinks it does not?

Business of Supply May 4th, 2021

Mr. Speaker, I really appreciate the hon. member's question on this. What we have to look at is what have we been seeing every year. It is the Aga Khan one year, SNC-Lavalin another, and then it was who will be getting stuff during this pandemic. We have seen over and over again what the Prime Minister's Office is doing. When it comes to transparency, it is something that the PMO does not do well. When it comes to accountability, the Prime Minister pushes it off on everybody else.

I very much respect the member's personal opinion on this, but I think we finally need to get accountability from the PMO. This may be the way we get there.

Business of Supply May 4th, 2021

Mr. Speaker, I too have great respect for the hon. member and love working with him. I look at the fact that we are not just talking about any old staffer, or about somebody that happens to be in my MP's office, or somebody doing communications.

We are talking about the number one staff person here in Canada. She is the chief of staff to our Prime Minister. Yes, ultimately the Prime Minister is 100% responsible, he and the defence minister, but maybe we will see the Prime Minister stand up for Katie Telford and actually start to tell the truth. Perhaps this is a way of calling his bluff.

Business of Supply May 4th, 2021

Mr. Speaker, I know the member has asked this question of many members of our party. The fact is that we know there was an investigation in 2015. We know that the former prime minister spoke to General Vance. As indicated by the testimony we heard at the status of women committee, there was this idea that General Vance was not telling the truth. That was also reported at the defence committee a few weeks ago. The fact is there was an investigation. It was different.

Here we are seeing that this was taken to the Prime Minister's Office in 2015, when the Prime Minister's Office was actually just opening and started questioning. They just said no and shut the door on the entire inquiry.

The chief of staff, Katie Telford, is the most powerful woman under any elected official. She is the chief of staff for the Prime Minister who runs this country. Somebody needs to be accountable.

Business of Supply May 4th, 2021

Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank my great colleague from Leeds—Grenville—Thousand Islands and Rideau Lakes who not only serves as a member of Parliament but has also served in the Canadian Armed Forces. I thank all of those who have served.

I am truly honoured to speak to this important opposition day motion. As the former chair of the status of women committee in the 42nd Parliament and a portion of the 43rd Parliament, and former shadow minister for women and gender equality, I say that this motion today is extremely important.

The investigation into General Vance, the treatment of our men and women in the Canadian Armed Forces and the culture of sexual misconduct must be investigated thoroughly. This begins at the very top, and that is exactly what we have brought forward today. Today's motion reads:

That, given that:

(a) women and all members of the Canadian Armed Forces placed their trust in this government to act on claims of sexual misconduct;

(b) the Prime Minister's Chief of Staff was informed about a specific sexual harassment allegation against General Jonathan Vance three years ago;

(c) the Prime Minister asserts that this sexual harassment allegation was never brought to his attention; and

(d) the Prime Minister said that those in a position of authority have a duty to act upon allegations, the House call upon the Prime Minister to dismiss his Chief of Staff for failing to notify him about a serious sexual harassment allegation at the highest ranks of the Canadian Armed Forces and for being complicit in hiding the truth from Canadians.

We can talk about timelines, which I know that many of the members speaking to this motion today will do. They will talk about the promotion of General Vance and former investigations, but most importantly they will talk about the top office in our country knowing of these allegations and doing nothing.

To begin, when we first started hearing about these allegations months ago following media reports, the PM indicated that his office knew nothing. We know, after testimony presented at the defence committee by a former adviser to the PMO, that this was not true. Katie Telford, the chief of staff to the Prime Minister, was aware of the allegations and was aware of the sexual nature of these allegations. The person who came forward as having an intimate relationship with General Vance was aware of the mindset, his personal views of his position and status within the Canadian Armed Forces, and the leadership within our country. She came forward to speak about what she saw and what she thought.

An article written by David Pugliese on April 22 is titled, “Gen. Vance boasted he was 'untouchable' by military police, Commons committee told”. This article states:

Canada’s former top soldier boasted that he was untouchable and that he “owned” the military police who are investigating allegations of sexual misconduct made against him.

We know, following testimony by military ombudsman Gary Walbourne in 2018, that an allegation of inappropriate behaviour was brought forward, and that chief of staff Katie Telford and the Minister of National Defence were both aware of this claim. Although the Prime Minister is indicating that nobody knew this was a #MeToo moment, email threads disprove that. Sexual harassment does equal a #MeToo moment.

I want to go back to my role as the chair of the status of women committee and the work that we had completed in a study tabled in June 2019. Unfortunately, I do not have a response from the government or from the minister on this. They were allocated 120 days to respond. We were short by a few days because we had gone into an election, so we never received a response on this. I would be very interested to hear what the defence minister would have to say about this.

I share with members some of the testimony, and why an allegation that was taken to the top office of our country and not acted upon was truly negligent. I want to talk about Operation Honour. Throughout the study on the treatment of women within the Department of National Defence, we heard a lot about this program and that it was a clear mandate. It states:

1.6. Operation HONOUR is the mission to eliminate sexual misconduct in the CAF. It is based on the principles that:

a. every member who serves their country deserves to be treated with dignity and respect—anything less is simply unacceptable; and

b. any attitudes or behaviours which undermine the camaraderie, cohesion, and confidence of serving members threatens the CAF’s long-term operational success.

1.7. Operation HONOUR seeks to achieve a positive institutional culture change in the Canadian Armed Forces through four lines of effort:

a. understanding the issue of sexual misconduct;

b. responding more decisively to incident;

c. supporting affected persons more effectively; and

d. preventing incidents from occurring.

General Vance, addressing the Standing Senate Committee on National Security and Defence in June 2018, stated:

Leaders need to drive change by providing vision and a consistent personal example that empowers and inspires subordinates to set the conditions for the elimination of sexual misconduct.

We listen to those words now, reflect on what we are talking about today and wonder who was in charge of that candy jar.

In the manual for Operation Honour under “Bystander Intervention Training”, it states the following:

[Canadian Armed Forces] Bystander Intervention unit-level training helps CAF members recognize and react decisively to sexual misconduct and harassment when they see it. This program illustrates to bystanders and leaders that if they fail to act when faced with an incident of sexual misconduct, they are perpetuating the behaviour. The program also explains the power that bystanders and leaders have to take positive action to stop sexual misconduct and support CAF members. In short, it demonstrates why it is crucial for witnesses to sexual misconduct to speak out against it, rather than stay silent.

The most ironic thing about all this is that this program was launched by General Vance. This program about what we needed to do when our members were facing sexual misconduct in the Canadian Armed Forces was led by General Vance. We heard from many former members of the Canadian Armed Forces who described their time in the forces and their own personal experiences. Why do I want to bring this forward? I want trust and confidence in our government, accountability and assurance that this will never happen again.

In testimony brought forward by former Canadian Armed Forces member Paula MacDonald, she stated the following:

When I was in basic training, I called the Canadian Armed Forces sexual response centre to ask them to help me. All they did at that time was the same thing that the ombudsman would do, which was to direct me back to the mechanisms within the Canadian Armed Forces that would deal with the abuse, so they directed me back to the individuals who were sexually harassing me to resolve the issues. There is no way you can resolve the issues with someone who is trying to do that to you.

Paula is no longer a member of the Canadian Armed Forces, but she does continue to have these conversations with members. She is quoted in that testimony also indicating the following:

It's still that way. I've asked them, and I've been following along with the changes to see how it's been evolving. The sexual response centre still refers the information to the chain of command. The individuals who were involved in direct positions that created incidents that I think are considered human rights violations.... They did a cabinet shuffle and moved them into positions that were to deal with Operation Honour.

Paula MacDonald's resolution would be to have a new reporting structure and to have people report “directly to the Minister of National Defence, as opposed to the chain of command in order to ensure that the harassment policies and procedures are being followed through.”

We look at this and understand that there has been so much discussion on this. There have been so many changes and so much socialization over the last number of years. We recognize that. I am looking at the fact that we are not doing anything right now about what is negatively impacting our men and women in the Canadian Armed Forces, and we should be doing more.

I wanted to quote something that Dr. Alan Okros stated during the committee. He said:

A common phase among young Canadians these days is “check your privilege”. An old phrase among military officers is “RHIP”, which means rank has its privileges. There's a culture clash.

This is important. We know, as members of Parliament, that there are issues with reporting. Why is this? It is because nothing ever gets done. We have studied this and talked about violence against women. We have talked about sexual harassment in the workplace and we have talked about #MeToo. When this is taken up to the very highest level of our government, when this is taken to the PMO, nothing is done.

Of General Vance, Major Brennan said, “In my experience, in many different areas, the law does not apply to him.” When someone like General Vance is in charge of a program, why would people not feel that they have no option but to take it to the Minister of National Defence or to the Prime Minister's Office? When they know that this is not working they have no other options.

Why does this land at the Prime Minister and Katie Telford? We know that individuals had gone there and that they were looking for assistance. They needed to bring this to the PMO, and the PMO did nothing. I bring us back to the operation and the top of the chain of command at the Canadian Armed Forces: The chief of the staff for the PM knew and remained silent, according to the Prime Minister, as he was not aware of this.

The bottom line is the Prime Minister's Office failed our Canadian Armed Forces. It failed Canadians and ultimately failed any woman here in Canada. It has turned a blind eye, and I believe that the Prime Minister's Office should speak and be open about this finally.