House of Commons photoWon his last election, in 2021, with 54% of the vote.
G8 and G20 Summits June 4th, 2010
Mr. Speaker, $400,000 for a steamboat in the riding of the ShamWow minister is scandalous but there is worse: $275,000 in public money for washrooms and a stage located 20 km from the meeting site.
That will be a long walk to get to the washrooms. Everyone will miss the official photo this time.
Except for the Prime Minister's director of communications who can hide out there to avoid the bailiffs, who is going to use these washrooms?
G8 and G20 Summits June 4th, 2010
Mr. Speaker, they can deny it all they want, but Canadians are not blind. They see what the Conservatives are up to and they are outraged.
Let the Conservatives explain why they are asking taxpayers to pay $100,000 for a gazebo located 100 km from the site.
Why are they paying $400,000 for a 1910 steamboat that will not even be in the water during the summit?
Why are they wasting Canadians' money?
Proactive Enforcement and Defect Accountability Legislation (PEDAL) Act June 3rd, 2010
Madam Speaker, I am delighted to rise today in the House to debate Bill C-511, the proactive enforcement and defect accountability legislation act, also known as the PEDAL act.
The bill was authored by my hon. Liberal colleague from Eglinton—Lawrence in direct response to the federal legislative shortcomings that resulted in the consequences related to the Toyota recall. My colleague recognized that there were major holes in the legislation. These shortcomings prevented the government from doing what we expect from it, which is protect Canadians.
Currently, all responsibility is vested in the companies. They determine whether they have a safety related defect, and they determine whether they will issue a recall.
Information about their products is provided to the government, but only if specifically asked, and they determine what the government sees or does not see.
We need to take the responsibility to ensure that the safety of vehicles and Canadians is transferred to where it belongs, which is with the Minister of Transport, Infrastructure and Communities. The PEDAL act will accomplish comprehensive improvements to the Motor Vehicle Safety Act. It will provide the Minister of Transport and his department with the information, tools, and legislative authority to protect Canadians.
The PEDAL act would mandate four major changes to the Motor Vehicle Safety Act, and I would like to summarize them briefly.
The first change deals with the definition of a safety-related defect. Presently, there is no specific definition for a safety-related defect, and therefore, manufacturers can avoid initiating a recall by claiming that the defect is not safety related. The PEDAL act will provide, once and for all, the definition of a safety-related defect to eliminate this ambiguity. This change, incidentally, was previously recommended when a review of the Motor Vehicle Safety Act was undertaken by the Department of Transport under the Liberals.
The second change to the act will create an early warning detection system that will require manufacturers to provide the minister with quarterly reports that contain domestic and foreign data related to potential safety related defects. With this information, the Department of Transport will have data that will allow it to monitor trends and complaints with a view toward addressing potential defects.
Currently, Transport Canada's intelligence is based on customer complaints addressed to the department. It receives, on average, 1,000 complaints a year, but it does not see the tens of thousands of complaints the dealers receive. This data, once compiled and analyzed, will give the department invaluable intelligence and will transform it from a reactive agency to a proactive guardian of safety. I think we would all agree that this is a desirable state of affairs.
The third major modernization the PEDAL act will introduce is new authority for the minister to order a recall. This is groundbreaking.
It comes as a surprise to many Canadians that this provision does not exist already. Yet under the current Motor Vehicle Safety Act, recalls can only be initiated by the manufacturer on a voluntary basis. We have all heard of recalls from various different companies for various different models at different times.
The fourth and final amendment of the PEDAL act proposes the installation of a brake override system on vehicles that use electronic throttle control. This system ensures that engine power is cut when the brakes are pressed, even if the accelerator pedal is stuck.
Bill C-511 is good legislation. All parties should support this bill. It is good public policy. If there is a way to make our laws stronger and safer, we need to act. As the Liberal critic, I support this bill and recommend that it be sent to committee for study to perhaps address some of the points that have been brought up by other hon. members.
If enacted, this bill will give the government the legislative tools it needs to better protect Canadian consumers. It will also make Canadian roads safer. I would like to congratulate my colleague for his diligent work on this issue and particularly for his focus on consumer safety.
Public Safety June 2nd, 2010
Mr. Speaker, the billion dollars squandered by the Conservatives could have paid for 34,000 hip operations or 17,000 nurses.
It would have covered the cost of the gun registry for 250 years.
The Conservative's incompetence is now absolutely clear: $1 billion has been sunk into three days of security. The Canadian public is outraged.
Do the Conservatives realize what their incredible incompetence is costing Canadians?
Public Safety June 2nd, 2010
Mr. Speaker, incompetence also costs money.
The Conservatives say that the Olympics was a smaller event than the summits. That is just laughable. There were over one million tourists in Vancouver for the Olympics. Clearly, they were using the summits as political plums for the ShamWow minister until they realized they had made a big mistake and had to move the G20 to Toronto. That big mistake is costing Canadians $1 billion to date. It is simply obscene.
Will the government admit that its partisanship and sheer incompetence are responsible for this billion dollar boondoggle?
Public Safety June 2nd, 2010
Mr. Speaker, Canadians will be paying more than $1 million for every minute of meetings of G8 and G20 heads of state. The Conservatives' convoluted explanations do not hold water.
At the Summit of the Americas, a comparable event with 34 heads of state, 16,000 delegates, and thousands of protesters, held in downtown Quebec City, security costs were $34 million, according to Treasury Board.
Why do we have to pay 30 times as much for an event organized by the Conservatives?
The Economy May 14th, 2010
Mr. Speaker, the Conservatives' incompetence is costing Canadians dearly. Not only have they driven up our debt, but they have made all kinds of promises they do not keep. How many photo ops did we see the with the Prime Minister and the Canadian navy? How many ships did they promise to build? They are good at self-promotion. How do they explain that the navy now needs to cut its patrol fleet in half? Are the Conservatives so short-sighted on purpose, or are they just incompetent?
The Economy May 14th, 2010
Mr. Speaker, Canadian families have been going through tough times as of late. At the same time, the Conservatives' deficit is estimated at over $50 billion. What is the government doing? It is insisting on another round of tax cuts for large corporations, when we already have one of the most competitive tax regimes in the world. We will lose $6 billion a year as a result of these tax cuts. This money could go to Canadian families to help them with much more pressing needs.
When will this government show some good judgment and work on this country's real priorities?
Competition Act (Inquiry into Industry Sector) May 12th, 2010
Madam Speaker, I rise today to speak to Bill C-452, legislation designed to protect Canadian consumers. Competition in Canadian industry is essential to the health of the Canadian economy. It encourages firms to develop new products and provides consumers with improved products and a variety of choices.
The Liberal Party believes in both healthy competition in the Canadian marketplace and consumer protection. We, as members of Parliament, must support legislation that encourages healthy competition within Canadian industries while offering solid protection to consumers.
Currently, Canada's Competition Act regulates trade and commerce in respect of conspiracies, trade practices and mergers affecting competition. The purpose of the act is to maintain and encourage competition in Canada in order to promote the efficiency and adaptability of the Canadian economy and in order to provide consumers with competitive prices and product choices.
The purpose of Bill C-452 introduced by my colleague from the Bloc is to ensure that the Competition Act applies to a specific case, in other words, to an entire industry sector.
My party is prepared to support this bill in the interest of competition and in order to clearly identify a case where the Competition Act must apply.
Some people may argue that existing legislation already covers this particular case. But let us be certain that this particular case proposed in Bill C-452 is covered and let us include it explicitly in the legislation with as few conditions and extra restrictions as possible. Let us get rid of any ambiguity.
I want to explain the specific situation being addressed in this bill. As the legislation currently dictates, the Commissioner of Competition is responsible for administering and enforcing the Competition Act. He or she has the authority to launch an inquiry into individual and specific cases where there may be a violation of the Competition Act. This should include the authority to independently initiate an inquiry into an entire industry.
Currently, the Competition Bureau must receive instructions from the minister or conduct an inquiry in response to a complaint filed by a company, consumer or legal entity. This means that Canadians are left unprotected if an official complaint is not made or the minister does not issue instructions. As a result, Canadian consumers could be subjected to unfair dealings, and this could conceivably be occurring at the level of an entire industrial sector.
Bill C-452 would provide the Commissioner of the Competition Bureau with the mandate to launch an inquiry into an entire industry if he or she deems it necessary to do so. Support for this bill would ensure that the Competition Bureau is provided with the necessary authority to take action against companies or individuals that attempt to take advantage of Canadian consumers.
The bill would strengthen the Competition Act, giving the government the right to initiate investigations when there are sufficient grounds to investigate possible collusion, price-fixing or anti-competitive behaviour in an entire industry sector.
We as legislators promised to protect the rights of consumers. I encourage my colleagues to join me in supporting Bill C-452 so we can accomplish just that.
I would like to take a moment to discuss the practical application of Bill C-452.
As I brought to the House's attention on Monday, gasoline pricing has been at the top of the minds of Canadians for many years. As we all know, and as my colleague from the Bloc pointed out, there have been allegations as well as proven cases of price-fixing at the pumps. This unjust manipulation takes advantage of consumers and threatens healthy competition.
Having spoken of one industry, this is not the only industry that this bill addresses. This bill is focused on any industry as a whole that provides a service or a product to the consumer. The current government promised to remedy this issue but we have not yet seen anything of substance presented by the government. It appears as though the Canadian government has largely forgotten about Canadians' concerns over gas pricing.
With the support of my colleagues, Bill C-452 would empower the Commissioner of Competition to initiate investigations that relate to this debacle and take action to ensure that these types of schemes do have consequences.
The amendment to the Competition Act may appear minor at first reading but the changes would ensure healthy competition in Canadian industry, including within the gasoline industry, a change which all hon. members can applaud.
I will close by reiterating that my party is prepared to support this bill in the interest of consumers. This bill should put us on the right track. We must debate it in committee to ensure that the Competition Act is clear on the issue of inquiries by the commissioner. We want to clearly identify the fact that an entire industry sector could be subject to an inquiry by the commissioner.
Finally, we must look at another important tool when we talk about the Competition Act. I am talking about the resources available to the commissioner to carry out his task unhindered. There is no use in conferring powers if the means to use them are not there. Let us take this opportunity with this bill to ensure that commissioner is given the necessary resources to do the job. We could then be sure that the Competition Act is an effective consumer protection tool.
Business of Supply May 11th, 2010
Madam Speaker, my interpretation of the situation with respect to the leader of the Bloc's tour of the country is that the Bloc is in a very painful situation. It has been 20 years since it began its quest. I do not doubt its members' sincerity and hard work in trying to achieve that quest, but it is a painful situation in which they find themselves. On the one hand, they would like to celebrate being around for 20 years and on the other hand, they would like to not celebrate being around for 20 years.
I believe that the leader of the Bloc is at loose ends as to finding a new strategy to make the quest of the Bloc relevant. He fell upon the idea of doing a tour of the country, perhaps hoping this might revive emotions in Quebec. However, the reality is that Quebeckers have moved on to other things. I think the leader is getting tired. I think he would like to do other things, perhaps provincially, but the door is not open to him there either.