House of Commons photo

Crucial Fact

  • Her favourite word was military.

Last in Parliament September 2021, as Conservative MP for Aurora—Oak Ridges—Richmond Hill (Ontario)

Lost her last election, in 2021, with 42% of the vote.

Statements in the House

Carbon Pricing October 29th, 2018

Mr. Speaker, we all agree climate change needs to be addressed, but the Liberal government has not shown Canadians how the carbon tax will reduce emissions. China produces 26% of all emissions while the U.S. produces over 15%, but Canada produces less than 1.5% yet we have a punishing tax that limits our competitiveness.

Canadians are willing to do their part to address climate change, but why is the Prime Minister putting Canadian businesses and our economy at risk for a carbon tax that will not even lower emissions?

Business of Supply October 22nd, 2018

Mr. Speaker, I am very deeply distressed by that comment. Ultimately, they have imposed on us tariffs related to national security.

To argue that there is no reason for them and they are baseless, we do that at our peril. If our closest ally believes that we are a national security threat, then we have to ensure that we do everything to demonstrate that we are not.

We are not meeting our commitments to NORAD. We are not meeting our commitments to NATO. We are not delivering on national security for our own Canadian citizens, but obviously now we have lost the confidence of our allies. To belittle and pooh-pooh it and say that we are not a national security threat is to mean that we take no action to ensure that we become secure.

Business of Supply October 22nd, 2018

Mr. Speaker, that is an incredibly important question, one that we should be asking the government.

We do not know exactly what the nature of the national security threat is that has caused the U.S. to put these punitive and costly tariffs on us. The fact remains that the United States has put punitive and costly tariffs on Canadian aluminum and steel and it has made it easier to put additional tariffs on in the future as a result of us being a national security threat.

We absolutely need to understand the contributing elements that are causing our ally, the United States, to believe us to be a national security threat. Then we need to know what the government is doing to ensure that it addresses it so we are no longer a national security threat and can have those punitive tariffs lifted.

Business of Supply October 22nd, 2018

Mr. Speaker, it is very disconcerting that the hon. member of the government would want to change the conversation so the Liberals do not have to assume responsibility and accountability for what they are not doing.

This is where we are today. This is the information we have. This is the problem in front of us. That is why this opposition is calling on the government to do what needs to be done today.

Do not let the government obfuscate the real issue which is this. How do we address the national security threat that these terrorists, who are not brought to justice, are imposing on Canada?

Business of Supply October 22nd, 2018

Mr. Speaker, a month ago I stood in the House deeply concerned for the future of our country and today I rise again to speak on the government's failure to address the priorities of our time.

Canada is a nation of peace. After two devastating world wars, we committed to concrete actions to achieve global peace and security. We were a founding member of the United Nations and the North Atlantic Treaty Organization.

When we signed the Washington treaty that established NATO in 1949, we reaffirmed our faith in the purpose and principles of the Charter of the United Nations and our desire to live in peace with all peoples and all governments.

Canada and our NATO allies committed to safeguarding the freedom, common heritage and civilization of our people founded on the principles of democracy, individual liberty and the rule of law. We committed to promoting stability and united our efforts for collective defence and for the preservation of peace and security.

That was almost 70 years ago and since then we have enjoyed a long period of peace, but not all points in history are equal, and once again we find ourselves at a tipping point.

The world has dramatically changed in the last few years and we now find ourselves in a time of unprecedented global instability. The world is the most unstable it has been, both from an economic and defence and security perspective since the end of World War II. We are seeing fundamental shifts in the global economy while trade relationships, international agreements and defence structures are under threat.

We are experiencing a substantive increase in threats from nation-states and also from non-state actors. These threats are not only through conventional military means such as occupying forces or missiles, but also are materializing from asymmetric threats such as economic and cybersecurity destabilizing measures and even more alarming, from radicalized individuals in our own backyard.

As a former air force officer, I swore an oath to serve and defend this country and the values for which it stands. I prioritized Canada's defence and security.

The Liberal government is not prioritizing the commitments made in the 1949 Washington treaty. The government is not ensuring the security of Canadians. Canada made a commitment to our allies and our international partners to contribute to global security, but the Liberal government is failing Canadians and our allies. Our allies are questioning whether or not they can count on us. They are questioning our resolve.

Actions speak louder than words and the government may say it is committed to our national security, but where is the evidence?

In June 2017, the Minister of Foreign Affairs announced her foreign policy and defence priorities. She said that turning aside from our responsibilities is not an option, that Canada can and must step up to play an active role in the preservation and strengthening of the global order from which we have benefited. It has been over a year since that statement but the government has not delivered. Canada has not stepped up.

The government has failed to define a plan to meet our commitment to spend 2% of our GDP on our military. It has failed our military by leaving one-third of the defence budget unspent this year alone. The government failed by purchasing used, 40-year-old F-18s from Australia, and now it is failing Canadians by allowing terrorists to escape justice.

That is why today's motion is of critical importance. Canada has 60 terrorists walking its streets that we know of and there are even more around the world. By not taking swift action to hold these terrorists accountable for their actions, Canada is not part of the solution but instead is part of the problem.

The government's failure to bring terrorists to justice has consequences. It is possible that the government through social assistance is paying these Canadian terrorists to sit at home, radicalize other people and plan their next attack, which could be right here at home. These terrorists are emboldened to continue to commit atrocious acts, knowing that the Canadian government will not bring them to justice.

In addition to allowing terrorists to continue unchecked, there are consequences to our international relations.

The United States, our single greatest ally, has labelled Canada a national security threat and imposed punitive and costly tariffs on Canadian steel and aluminum.

The U.S. has claimed that we are enjoying a free ride in defence and has even gone as far as to imply that we and our other NATO allies are foes rather than friends. Now, with the new NAFTA and section 232 of the American trade law, it is even easier for the United States to impose tariffs on Canada if they deem us a further national security threat. Two U.S. senators have even gone further to connect national security concerns with Five Eyes joint intelligence-sharing and co-operation. Does that mean that if Canada does not improve its national security, the U.S. might restrict intelligence it shares with Canada?

If the U.S. has labelled Canada a national security threat and the Liberal government allows terrorists to roam free, then what arguments does the government have to say that Canada is not a national security threat? Failure to bring terrorists to justice puts Canadians in grave danger, compromises our relations internationally, undermines our global security and puts the world at risk. We can no longer turn a blind eye or downplay the severity of the government's inaction. These are terrorists and we have a responsibility to protect our citizens at home and safeguard the freedom, common heritage and civilization of our allies.

That is why we are calling on the government to immediately acknowledge the gravity of this issue. The government must commit to developing a plan to bring justice to anyone, including those in Canada or have Canadian citizenship and have fought as an ISIS terrorist or participated in any terrorist activity. This plan should acknowledge the severity of the problem, outline action to support international laws, review and reinforce Canadian law and demonstrate how we can use existing legal tools to bring terrorists to justice.

The plan must be substantive and include, but not be limited to, demonstrating how Canada will support the laws of foreign countries and international law to ensure that individuals who commit terrorist acts are brought to justice, provide support for the investigators and prosecutors of ISIS terrorists mandated through UN Security Council resolution 2379, identify reforms to Canadian law to ensure that the perpetrators of terrorist acts will be brought to justice, identify reforms to the Canadian criminal justice system to ensure that courts have access to all the evidence and place conditions such as peace bonds on suspected terrorists to restrict their movements and social interactions.

If there is no action to bring terrorists to justice, is Canada carrying its weight for national and global security? If terrorists escape justice and are free to commit future acts of terrorism, then the answer is clearly no. Canada's national security is compromised and Canadians are at risk. The government must act now to protect Canadians. The government must act now to regain the confidence of our allies and demonstrate we are not a national security threat. The government must prioritize and develop a plan to bring terrorists to justice. The Liberals must not only support this motion but follow through with concrete actions. Our national security and the safety of Canadians are at stake.

Ethics October 22nd, 2018

Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister continues to hide by saying he cannot comment on Vice-Admiral Norman's case. We are not asking him to comment on the details of the case. We are asking him to fulfill the government's responsibility to ensure a fair trial.

The government holds critical evidence. We are asking him to simply answer the question. Who is he protecting, what is he hiding and on what date was James Cudmore offered a job in the office of the Minister of National Defence?

Justice October 18th, 2018

Mr. Speaker, we are not asking for any questioning of the independent system. What we are asking for is for the government, whose responsibility it is, to provide the documents to be able to have the evidence filed.

The prosecution of Vice-Admiral Norman has been politically motivated from the start. The Prime Minister is hiding evidence and refuses to release it, jeopardizing his right to a fair trial. The evidence will reveal the truth.

Who is the Prime Minister protecting? What is he hiding? If he has nothing to hide, why will he not release the evidence?

Justice October 18th, 2018

Mr. Speaker, the independent judicial system requires evidence. It is the government that is responsible for producing that evidence.

The Prime Minister promised Canadians a transparent, accountable and open government, but that is not what the Liberals have delivered. Instead, the Liberals are using political games to hide the truth. In the case of Vice-Admiral Norman, the Liberals are refusing to release critical evidence central to his defence.

Can the Prime Minister honour his commitment to be open and transparent, honour our judicial system and the rule of law, and release the evidence?

Corrections and Conditional Release Act October 18th, 2018

Madam Speaker, the hon. minister has given us a very good perspective that there are challenges with safety and security in our prison system. That is obviously highly disconcerting and is why he has brought this legislation forward.

Could the minister give us the performance metrics? How is he measuring safety and security in the prison system today, and how in this legislation would he measure it going forward to ensure that the legislation would actually deliver the outcomes and results he is intending?

Justice October 17th, 2018

Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister did not believe in the independence of the justice system when he tried and convicted Vice-Admiral Norman before he was even charged.

It is clear that from the start of this case that the prosecution of Vice-Admiral Mark Norman was politically motivated. The Prime Minister is hiding documents and refuses to release them for Vice-Admiral Norman's defence, jeopardizing his right to a fair trial, documents that will reveal the truth.

If the Prime Minister has nothing to hide, why will he not release these documents?