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

Business of Supply May 31st, 2021

Madam Chair, we have heard that Canada's approach to the made-in-America executive order is to educate all aspects of the political and industry sectors in the U.S. on Canada's integrated approach to ensure they are aware of any unintended consequences. Speaking candidly, it could be viewed as naive for us to think that President Biden and our U.S. neighbours have not made themselves aware of all the consequences, yet decided to pursue a made-in-America action anyway.

Canada's approach is not working. The U.S. has cancelled Keystone XL. We have lost auto jobs. We are not making progress on softwood lumber. The steel and aluminum manufacturing industry in Canada has lost jobs as they have moved to the U.S.

Could the minister tell us how the policies and Canada's approach will be changing so that we receive a different result?

Business of Supply May 31st, 2021

Madam Chair, could the minister let us know whether she has been successful in gaining a commitment that Canada will not be excluded from the federal infrastructure plan of the United States?

Business of Supply May 31st, 2021

Madam Chair, I will be sharing my time with the member for Chicoutimi—Le Fjord.

My questions are for the Minister of Foreign Affairs.

President Biden, in his made-in-America executive order on January 25, made a clear statement about the priority and direction that the U.S. would take in terms of ensuring the future is made in America and by all of America's workers.

Has the minister gained commitment from the United States that Canadian companies will be able to bid directly on all aspects of the U.S. $2 trillion federal infrastructure plan?

National Defence May 11th, 2021

Mr. Speaker, the defence minister and Katie Telford withheld critical information about Canada's top soldier from the Prime Minister. Tragically, the Prime Minister gave General Vance a performance bonus, a pay raise, and allowed him to continue in his position despite serious unresolved allegations of misconduct against him. This is reprehensible and should never have happened. Under the Prime Minister, no one is at fault. No one is held accountable.

Will the Prime Minister admit that he was wrong to reward General Vance while allegations of misconduct remained unresolved?

National Defence May 11th, 2021

Mr. Speaker, there can only be trust in our military when Canadians have confidence that their elected representatives will hold the military in check. An unelected and unaccountable member of the Prime Minister's staff decided to withhold critical information from the Prime Minister, breaking that trust.

Any allegation against Canada's top general is serious and could jeopardize the safety of the country and its citizens. Who told Katie Telford that the allegations against General Vance were not a safety issue: the defence minister, the Privy Council or General Vance?

Committees of the House May 10th, 2021

Mr. Speaker, ultimately, my colleagues and I, on the Conservative side, have brought this forward in this urgent discussion today because we have not seen a plan B. The plan B to use trucks and rail is not actually a viable plan B because we have been told by witnesses at committee that there is a shortage of trucks and there is not enough rail capacity.

Essentially, the current government plan says it is never going to happen. Obviously, we, as Canadians, hope that is correct, I do not think it is a viable plan because we need a plan B that says what we are going to do if our greatest fear that this pipeline is shut down happens. That is why the recommendations, the sense of urgency and this discussion are so important in the short term, but also in the long term to make sure that we do not find ourselves in this position again.

Committees of the House May 10th, 2021

Mr. Speaker, the important question is what are we, as Canadians, going to do today. This should be a wake-up call for us. We have the highest environmental standards in the world and we hold our companies to a very high standard. If the rest of the world were to meet our standard, greenhouse gases would be reduced by a whopping 25%.

The question is not how we got here, but what are we going to do to protect the environment, energy security and Canada's own self-sufficiency so we are not vulnerable to decisions made in other jurisdictions.

Committees of the House May 10th, 2021

Mr. Speaker, the fact is to never say never. The Governor of Michigan has said that she is absolutely committed to shutting this down, not to mention that this is not something new. The discussion started officially in November of last year, but this narrative and this trend toward shutting it down has been going on since 2015. Canada has not taken it as seriously as we needed to.

I do not believe that is going to go away, which is why, at the same time, even if we are able to reverse a decision and have this pipeline continue, we still need a plan B and some mechanism to protect Canada's energy security going forward.

Committees of the House May 10th, 2021

Mr. Speaker, I will be splitting my time with the member for Prince Albert.

Today's concurrence debate on the interim report for Enbridge Line 5 is vitally important and matters to Canadians. Canada is on the precipice of a national energy security emergency, and the deadline is Wednesday, May 12. A critical piece of Canada's energy infrastructure is set to be shut down, and Canada simply does not have the luxury of time.

On November 13, 2020, the State of Michigan revoked the easement that allows the Enbridge Line 5 pipeline to travel underwater through the Straits of Mackinac between Lake Michigan and Lake Huron. Unless reversed, this decision requires Enbridge to cease operations of this section of the line by this Wednesday. However, any disruption to Line 5 will be devastating for Canada's energy security and economic well-being.

Enbridge Line 5 carries up to 540,000 barrels a day of petroleum products, including light crude oil and natural gas liquids from Alberta and Saskatchewan. It supplies over 53% of Ontario's crude oil and 66% of Quebec's. Line 5 provides an estimated 4,900 direct jobs and up to 23,000 indirect jobs in the supported industries. It supplies significant portions of diesel fuel, propane for Canada's east and much of the jet fuel that supports Pearson airport. Line 5 generates over $65 billion of direct and $28 billion of indirect revenue in annual trade.

Closure of this section of the pipeline under the Straits of Mackinac would require 2,000 tanker trucks or 800 railcars a day to keep pace with the demand. Estimates indicate that there would not be enough surplus truckload and railcar capacity to support this increase. Furthermore, a rise in the volume of trucks on Canada's roads and at the border would dramatically increase congestion, vehicle emissions and the risk of serious traffic accidents.

This should be a wake-up call for Canada, not only because of the short-term challenges but for the long-term ones as well. Citizens in Ontario, Quebec and the maritime provinces heat their homes, support their families and keep planes and trains moving and crops growing because of western Canadian oil and gas that travels to eastern Canada, among other places, through Line 5.

The decision to shut down a portion of the pipeline happens this Wednesday, so in the short term, what is the plan B if Canada is unable to get this decision reversed? Where will the additional trucks or railcars come from when there is already a shortage in our ability to use rail and get supplies to market? How will the tens of thousands of jobs be replaced? What will this shutdown do to the price of oil, gas and propane? How will aircraft at Pearson airport get back in the air? Even more importantly, how will this affect our economic recovery after COVID, at a time when lives and livelihoods have already been so drastically disrupted during the pandemic?

Even more disconcerting are the long-term implications. A unilateral decision made outside of Canadian jurisdiction threatens the very health and security of millions of Canadians. Even if it was not a U.S. political decision and was instead a natural disaster or equipment failure that threatened the delivery continuity of this pipeline, Canada's overwhelming dependence on this one infrastructure asset is simply too great. Canada must have an alternative, preferably one that transits from east to west entirely within Canada.

COVID-19 has made every Canadian increasingly aware of the risk of dependence on other countries for critical health, safety and security supplies. As a trading nation, being part of a global supply chain is central to Canada's economic prosperity. However, this must be balanced with domestic self-sufficiency for critical items that Canadians cannot live without, such as PPE, vaccines and critical drug supplies. With the threat to Enbridge Line 5, Canada's self-sufficiency should also include the supply of oil, gas and propane, which support the agriculture that feeds us and the energy that keeps us warm.

Climate change is real, and as Canadians we must do our part to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and contribute to sound environmental stewardship. The Canadian oil and gas industry meets the highest environment regulations and standards in the world. Other countries look to Canada to achieve a higher standard in environmentally responsible resource production. If all of the oil- and gas-producing nations around the world adopted Canadian standards, worldwide greenhouse gas emissions would be reduced by a substantial 25%. Canadians can be proud of the current standards that have been achieved and the research that is under way to further push the boundaries of greenhouse gas reductions.

Despite being the world's sixth-largest oil-producing nation, Canadians get 44% of their supply from foreign producers rather than domestic supply. Increased use of Canada's domestic oil and gas supply would reduce Canada's energy vulnerability and the nation's total greenhouse gas emissions.

The future of Line 5 is in the hands of the U.S. courts, and with it Canada's fortunes. That is why this report by the Canada-U.S. economic relationship special committee is so important, as are the critical recommendations. I would like to share with the House four of the seven recommendations that are drastically worthy of note.

The first says, “That the Prime Minister of Canada and his Ministers pursue frequent and direct dialogue on the issue of Line 5 with the U.S. President and his administration, in an attempt to resolve this dispute diplomatically as soon as possible.” We have not seen this. It must happen. We do not have the luxury of time, and we need a sense of urgency. We need the Prime Minister to take this matter up with the President of the United States.

Second, we need to put forward Canada's legal perspective, so we recommend:

That, based on the information currently available to the Special Committee, the Government of Canada file an amicus curiae brief if a negotiated or mediated settlement permitting the continued operation of Line 5 is not reached between Enbridge, Inc. and the State of Michigan prior to the date by which such briefs must be filed. The brief should set out Canada’s legal position with respect to the operation of pipelines that cross international boundaries, including but not limited to advising the court of any rights set out in bilateral or multilateral treaties or agreements....

This includes the one that protects the Line 5 pipeline, which is the 1977 agreement between the Government Of Canada and the Government of the United States Of America concerning transit pipelines.

Third, we need to start looking into what our plan B is if the decision is not reversed. We recommend:

That the Government of Canada work with industry to develop contingency plans designed to ensure that Canadian oil and gas products will continue to be delivered in a timely fashion to the Canadian refineries and industries that rely on the Line 5 pipeline should an interruption to Line 5’s service occur.

Obviously we do not want an interruption. Obviously we want this decision to be reversed. However, we cannot just say that it is going to happen. We have to have an urgent plan B.

Lastly and most importantly, we recommend:

That, in light of the external threat posed to Line 5’s continued operation, the Government of Canada should evaluate other possible vulnerabilities to Canada’s critical energy infrastructure and supply chains, and develop contingency plans to ensure that Canadian interests are protected in the event of disruptions.

Canada's energy security, economic recovery and commitment to climate change require an oil and gas pipeline that connects west to east entirely within Canada. It is the right thing for Canada and it is the right thing for the contribution that Canadians make, as global citizens, to the world.

National Defence May 5th, 2021

Mr. Speaker, more reviews and more training are not enough. The Prime Minister's inaction has emboldened the military old boys' club and reinforced and entrenched a toxic culture. He refuses to hold those at the highest levels accountable, not the defence minister, no senior member of the Privy Council, no one on the Prime Minister's staff. Promotions and postings for all general officers must be frozen until all those who are complicit are held accountable.

Will the Prime Minister fire those who have failed in their duties to Canadians?