House of Commons photo

Crucial Fact

  • Her favourite word was respect.

Last in Parliament October 2019, as Conservative MP for Milton (Ontario)

Lost her last election, in 2019, with 36% of the vote.

Statements in the House

Air Canada Public Participation Act April 20th, 2016

Madam Speaker, the last time we saw the Liberals make a snap decision, it had to do with inserting themselves in a question that had been asked about extending the runway at Billy Bishop airport. The beneficiary in that snap decision was Air Canada.

Now we have another snap decision brought to the fore very quickly, as we are stopping debate on the topic. Who is the beneficiary of this knee-jerk reaction? It is Air Canada.

I wonder what other sweetheart deals the Liberals have in store for Air Canada. Quite frankly, they do not need to make any legislative amendments to allow a private company to enter into agreements that would bring litigation to a close. They do not need to do this, so why are they doing it and what are they getting out of it?

The Budget April 20th, 2016

Mr. Speaker, Canadians deserve to have confidence in a government. The Liberals inherited a surplus from us. That is what the PBO said. They manipulated private sector economists' projections for their own purpose. They padded deficit projections by the billions, and they have exaggerated how many jobs Canadians can expect out of the budget. That is what the parliamentary budget officer said.

Does the minister realize, quite frankly, that his economic credibility is in tatters and that Canadians deserve to have somebody and some government that can actually manage their tax dollars responsibly?

The Budget April 20th, 2016

Mr. Speaker, yesterday, the parliamentary budget officer released his report on budget 2016. First, he confirmed that the government did indeed inherit a surplus from us. He also confirmed that the Liberals' plan will cost significantly more than the $10 billion that they promised Canadians. However, most importantly, he confirmed that their plan actually lacked incredibly important details.

When will the minister face the facts that they talk a good game but they are really not delivering on an open and honest government?

The Budget April 11th, 2016

Mr. Speaker, I want to thank the hon. member for his great work on this file, along with the member for Elgin—Middlesex—London.

I have read Hansard, going back to when the government first introduced the universal child care benefits and the importance of universality at the time. What members said in the 1960s and what we say today is exactly the same thing, which is that every child in Canada deserves to have the support of their government. That is exactly the reason why we chose to introduce universality.

One thing we can take from this budget is the following. In 2006, the Liberals at the time campaigned vigorously against our introduction of the universal child care benefit, to the point where they said that we could not give money to parents or families because they would spend it on beer and popcorn.

The Liberals have seen the light. Not only have they brought it back, but they have increased it in some cases. However, they have taken away universality, which is a great difficulty for a lot of Canadians who simply do not understand that if their family income is $92,000 a year, they will not benefit from any of these new plans.

The Budget April 11th, 2016

Mr. Speaker, I thank the hon. member for his question and his attention to my speech. I do appreciate that.

Within that legislation there are two pieces, and within the first piece about the tax cut there was an implicit promise. The promise was that any tax changes would be revenue neutral. We now know it will cost Canadian taxpayers $1.4 billion, so it will come back at the end of the day in the form of another tax.

However, the other reason that it was very important to stand our ground with respect to the passing of this legislation was because the Liberal government sought to lower the limits of the tax-free savings accounts within that same piece. That is a very important vehicle for Canadians to save money. As well, I do not think the Liberals understand that it also substitutes as pools of capital for small start-ups in this country.

I think the Minister of Finance understood it, though, because he clearly said in his book, The Real Retirement, the following: “TFSAs, introduced in 2009, are currently too new and the contribution limits too low”. They were too low at $5,000 at that point. However, he went on to say, “Most likely, they will grow in popularity as appreciation for their specific advantages grows”.

The member should maybe ask his Minister of Finance why he suddenly changed his advice.

The Budget April 11th, 2016

Mr. Speaker, the minister should know from his finance department that the median average wage for the Canadian middle class in the past 10 years rose 13% under the Conservative mandate.

The minister said that he consulted private-sector economists for predictions to the economy. He did not take their advice. The Liberals promised and advised many times that they would reduce the small business tax. They did not take small business tax advice either.

This is the question I have for the minister. Why is he even bothering to consult with small or big business owners in this country when he is not going to take their advice?

The Budget April 11th, 2016

Mr. Speaker, the government says that we are in a recession, but the evidence from Statistics Canada is that we are not. The government says it is going to be financially transparent, but the evidence from the parliamentary budget officer is that it is not.

The government says it is the saviour of the middle class, but the evidence from Finance Canada, which was just forced out of it by the parliamentary budget officer, is that the Liberals plan on slashing this help to the middle class by 75% by 2021.

Let us just cut to the chase here, since we know where this is going. Can the Minister of Finance tell us today which taxes he is actually going to raise on us?

The Budget April 11th, 2016

Mr. Speaker, today I am very pleased to be sharing my time with my friend the member for Brantford—Brant.

A couple of weeks ago, the Minister of Finance was trying on his new shoes for the budget, and I can appreciate the need for new shoes, personally speaking. However, the finance minister did it at the Boys and Girls Club in Toronto, which is a place that is very well known for teaching life lessons and giving kids a good foundation. I felt a sense of irony when the minister chose this spot to talk about his plan for the Liberal budget, because it is a plan that actually commits Canadians to long-term structural deficits, and it is the future generations in that room who will be paying for it. While the Liberals struggle with the notion that, if they borrow money, some day they have to pay it back, kids understand very well that when one lends something, there is an expectation that it will be given back one day.

Before the Liberals took office, taxes in this country were at their lowest point in 50 years. By the end of the Conservative mandate, the average family of four in Milton was saving $7,000 per year, our debt-to-GDP ratio was actually lower than when the Conservatives took office, and it has been confirmed by the good people at Finance Canada that we left the government with a balanced budget and a surplus, to the point of $4.3 billion. However, as with all things, times have changed.

One of the first things the Liberal government did since taking office was actually undo the advances the Conservatives had made over the past 10 years. In doing so, it completely abandoned its election promise to cap its deficit at $10 billion. It decided it was no longer important to aim for a balanced budget, and I am sure that when it is pressed, it will also reverse on the debt-to-GDP ratio.

The Liberal budget, as presented, is very disconcerting, and Canadians cannot actually comprehend what the Liberal government is attempting to do in this plan and how it tries to justify it. The finance minister's last economic outlook actually showed that revenues were holding up better than expected. GDP growth in the last quarter of 2015 was also higher than expected. Canada is not in a recession, yet the Liberal government is on track to borrow millions and billions of dollars in order to solve a recession that is not happening.

Plans for this spending spree confirm what Conservatives have long believed: Liberals are more concerned about optics than they are with helping Canadians. The budget sets out spending that is untargeted, and this spending will actually end up hurting Canadians in the long run in the form of tax increases. The budget is nothing more than a betrayal of the middle class, because Conservatives understand that, if the Liberals are not willing to control spending, taxes will eventually go up to pay for the money that has been borrowed.

It is a betrayal of families, because they understand that their household budgets cannot be sustained on credit. As well, it is a betrayal of small businesses, the 1.2 million Canadian men and women who were promised relief by every party in the election campaign, because that relief leads to job creation and solid economic investments. It was the Liberal government that turned on them. In addition, it is a betrayal of Canadians who trusted the Liberals not only to keep the promise to small business, because that is where 98% of the economy is, but to keep their election promises.

I originally come from Cape Breton Island, where unfortunately I learned a thing or two about unemployment, the long-term effects, and what happens when Liberals try to fix our problems. There are more than 100,000 Canadians out of work today in the oil and gas industry alone. In a recent poll, Canadians across the country said very clearly—46% of them, actually—that they are concerned for either their own jobs or the jobs of others in their households. Those 46% of Canadians live with the weight in their minds and hearts of whether they are going to have jobs.

Families need to see a real plan to ensure that we are creating well-paying jobs. However, what they are seeing instead is small business being saddled with an increase in payroll taxes, as well as the provinces being encouraged to introduce a carbon tax. Both of these are job-killing measures that discourage investment in our economy.

In the last two weeks, we have had the ability to speak with folks in our ridings, and some of us have spoken to folks in their ridings as well. The one question I get is this: “What did they buy with $30 billion of our money?” I cannot blame people for being confused. Canadians are seeing money fly out the door with no assurance that they are going to get value. However, here is the best part. The Liberals call it investments, when we know it is spending.

Canadians are not the only ones who are confused, it would appear. Last week, the parliamentary budget officer released a scathing response, providing proof that the budget is not only overinflated, not only an overestimation, but it is not transparent. Is that not a far cry from what the Liberals offered on the campaign trail? The PBO pointed to a massive hole in the budget and asked this very pertinent question: How is the government going to fill it? The response, just like now, is silence, because there is no response.

It is mind-boggling to Canadians that the government has planned deficits of $115 billion over the next five years and it has yet to decide what it is going to spend it on. Since the campaign, the Liberals have been forced to admit that their math has been wrong. They miscalculated the price of their own tax plan. They miscalculated the size of their own deficits. As well, as if it is not bad enough that Canadians do not have confidence in their math, the Liberals suggest continually, including today, that we should not trust the math prepared by the officials at Finance Canada that shows we left a surplus.

It is no wonder that Canadians are worried. The Liberals have clearly demonstrated that they have an inability to make the hard choices that governing requires. They have demonstrated an even greater inability to provide measures for Canadians that will actually help them.

The Conservatives found themselves in a tough economic situation, the great recession. That is why we had a plan to return to balance, to live within our means. We achieved that in 2015.

I was opposed to a modest $10-billion budget, and I said that during the election campaign. Had the Liberals actually kept that pledge, we would have ensured that every single cent went to encouraging job creation. However, that number was a dream compared to the nightmare scenario we are looking at today.

Uncontrolled spending will inevitably lead to long-term structural deficits that are simply unsustainable. Some economists go as far as to say that it is $150 billion in new debt over the next four years alone. Now the Liberals say that the only thing that matters is debt-to-GDP ratio, but that is not true. The only thing that can be controlled in debt-to-GDP ratio by the government is the debt. It cannot control growth, and it certainly cannot control interest rates.

Why does the government not focus on the things that it can influence? Those are creating proper incentives to stimulate economic growth, watching the debt, and ensuring we are not increasing departmental sizes to the point where they become unsustainable.

I have one final word with respect to the budget, and it is a word that we have difficulty with on our side of the House. However, it is definitely not a difficulty on the other side of the House, and that comes to taxes. As I pointed out already, we strove to reduce taxes because we know that is what we do to spur economic growth and have companies create jobs. The government has set it up so that the Liberals' tax increases have moved a tax rate in Canada above 50%. In some provinces, as in Ontario, people are paying 53.5% in income tax to the government before they get to keep any of their money. However, that is not all. The Liberals broke their promise to small business, 1.2 million Canadians, on their taxes. The Liberals are also encouraging carbon taxes, and employers are going to be left with no choice but to look at their stock of employees and determine who will lose their jobs.

It is in times like this that it is important for us to be responsible, to live within our means, and to have a plan. However, this budget is unconstrained. It is haphazard spending. It is not economic stimulus. Any long-term benefits will be outweighed by the enormous literal costs, and as such it must be firmly opposed.

The Budget April 11th, 2016

Mr. Speaker, when I was a minister in the former government, I had many conversations with the member opposite, and with the people of Prince Edward Island through their elected representatives, with respect to ensuring that they had secondary sources of energy through an electrical cable that would attach Prince Edward Island to the mainland in New Brunswick. There was much lobbying about it. There was a great business case put forward, because it was an important piece of infrastructure that was needed. I find it interesting that the hon. member stood today to talk about everything he received for Prince Edward Island. I would also say that they understood, at that point in time, the importance of having this extra piece of infrastructure to ensure they had an energy supply.

At the end of the day, my question to the member, who is the chairman of the finance committee, is this. Knowing as much as he knows about the importance of energy to the maritime provinces and to Atlantic Canada, can he tell the House right now that he is firmly in support of the energy east pipeline for the other provinces in Atlantic Canada, and that he will vigorously lobby the Minister of Natural Resources and the Minister of Environment and Climate Change to ensure that this will be built quickly?

The Budget March 22nd, 2016

Mr. Speaker, the fine officials at Finance Canada today provided their independent analysis and have reported that for the April 2015 to January 2016 period, the government actually posted a budgetary surplus of $4.3 billion.

In other news, the finance minister has introduced a budget today that, quite frankly, is a betrayal of the middle class. We see a $1.3-billion increase in personal income taxes; we see increased taxes on students; we have seen families stripped of the children's fitness tax credit and the children's arts tax credit; the Liberals have broken their promise to small business and are not decreasing their taxes and, indeed, have increased the payroll tax today; they have increased taxes on charities; and, most unconscionably, they have raided the defence budget to the tune of $3.7 billion on a day when men and women in this country don a uniform and put themselves in harm's way just because of that fact. However, they still need to borrow.

On page 51 of this document, the minister writes that the government remains committed to returning to balance, but every projection through 2021 still says “deficit”.

Would the minister please let us know, when will the government stop borrowing, especially since he is doing it on the backs of Canadians to pay for the projects of their Liberal friends?