House of Commons photo

Crucial Fact

  • His favourite word was environment.

Last in Parliament June 2019, as Conservative MP for Langley—Aldergrove (B.C.)

Won his last election, in 2015, with 46% of the vote.

Statements in the House

The Environment February 18th, 2005

Mr. Speaker, the environment ministry has had eight years to come up with a plan for Kyoto and yet it has done nothing. There is no plan, just empty rhetoric.

Canadian air pollution levels have dramatically increased while the Liberal government does nothing. Four months ago I met with the minister about air pollution levels in the Fraser Valley. He had a chance to stand up against a proposed U.S. polluter 500 metres from the Canadian border but again did nothing.

When will he secure a cross-border agreement on air pollution and when will we see the Kyoto plan?

Official Languages Act February 17th, 2005

Mr. Speaker, I am not rising in the House today to hear an hon. member read from a brochure. I am here for answers. Dying people cannot wait.

I have some statistics. The annual budget for this program is $221 million. It has been in operation for one year and only $7 million of that $221 million have been spent.

There is a category of “other”. I am asking the minister to define “other”. Is a sister family? Is a brother family? I believe they should be because these are the types of Canadians who are taking care of one another. A sibling is family. The sloppy legislation that we have here where “other” is not defined, needs to be dealt with in a timely fashion, not an hon. member reading from a brochure.

Ministers do have discretion. We have heard that ministers have had discretion to bring strippers into Canada. We have heard that ministers have discretion to fast-track legislation, like trying to undemocratically redefine marriage. We are hearing now that ministers do not have discretion and they will not be dealing with compassionate care in a timely fashion.

I ask the minister to do the right thing, to represent Canada and provide compassionate care so families can stay together.

Official Languages Act February 17th, 2005

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to share concerns, representing one of my constituents from Langley, regarding the compassionate care benefit program.

The compassionate care benefit program started a year ago in January 2004. The brochure reads:

One of the most difficult times anyone can face is when a loved one is dying or at risk of death. The demands of caring for a gravely ill or dying family member can jeopardize the employment of Canadians and the economic security of their families...The Government of Canada believes that, during such times, Canadians should not have to choose between keeping their jobs and caring for their families.

I have a true story to tell but to respect the confidentiality and privacy of the family I will be using the name Sue. Sue is a 43 year old woman from Langley who has been caring for her 73 year old mother for a number of years now. It is a very close, loving family. Sue was recently diagnosed with terminal cancer and given two to eight weeks to live. Sue is no longer able to care for her mother so her sister left her job and home in Okanagan, British Columbia to come down and care for Sue.

On January 17, Sue's sister and family applied at the EI office for the compassionate care program, which is there to make it possible for family to take care of one another in a situation like this. Sue's family was told that the sister could not qualify for the compassionate care benefit because a sister was not considered family under the legislation. Sue has no husband and no children and, as I said, her sister is her family. The EI staff said that they could not make the assumption that she was family.

Another portion of this compassionate care program says that “other” could also qualify for this, and I will share further on the word “other”. The problem with “other” in the legislation is that it was never defined. The EI staff said that they did not have the authority to define “other”, and therefore Sue's sister did not qualify for this package.

The family was told no on January 17 and on January 19 they visited our Langley office. On January 20, I sent off a letter to the Minister of Human Resources regarding this urgent matter. On February 2, I personally delivered a copy of that letter to the minister. On February 4, I stood in the House and asked the minister to do something on this. On February 7, I received a response from the minister in which she said that she did not have discretion to help this family.

I have been working with the minister and with this family for about a month now and to this point nothing has happened. We have been told that the minister does not have the discretion. The Library of Parliament has shared that the EI Commission does have the discretion.

I am here today to ask the minister when she will do something. Will she direct the EI Commission to look at this in a timely manner so that the needs of the family can be met and the compassionate care program can truly meet what it is there for?

Petitions February 16th, 2005

Mr. Speaker, I have a second petition from the Langley-Surrey area. The petitioners are asking Parliament to include autism as a required treatment and to create academic chairs at universities in each province to provide training for autism.

Petitions February 16th, 2005

Mr. Speaker, I am honoured to present a petition from Langley residents. The petitioners state that the majority of Canadians support the current definition of marriage and they are calling on Parliament to provide legislation to preserve and protect the current definition of marriage as being between one man and one woman.

Petitions February 9th, 2005

Mr. Speaker, my second petition is on the definition of marriage. The petitioners call upon the House of Commons to enact legislation in support of the traditional definition of marriage being between a man and a woman.

Petitions February 9th, 2005

Mr. Speaker, I also have two petitions to present today.

The first petition is from hundreds of Langley residents also dealing with the issue of autism. They ask that the treatment of autism be considered a medically necessary treatment and require that all provinces provide this essential treatment. They also ask for the creation of academic chairs at universities in each province.

Petitions February 4th, 2005

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to present petitions on behalf of over 600 Canadians across this land, including concerned citizens from my riding of Langley.

The petition calls for Parliament to amend the Canada Health Act and corresponding regulations to include IBI, ABA autism therapy for children with autism, as a medically necessary treatment and require that all provinces provide or fund this essential treatment for autism.

These petitioners also ask Parliament to contribute to the creation of academic chairs at a university in each province to teach IBI, ABA autism treatment, at the undergraduate and doctoral level in each province so that Canadian professionals will no longer be forced to go outside of our country for this critical training.

Human Resources February 4th, 2005

Mr. Speaker, the EI act allows for the category of “other” to claim the benefit, but the year-old bill neglected to the define the word “other”. EI staff will not assume that it includes a sibling. The minister has the responsibility to correct this now and can make the necessary changes to include siblings under the definition of “other”. I want to hear from that minister. Will this minister immediately make these changes to allow this family to stay together?

Human Resources February 4th, 2005

Mr. Speaker, in my riding of Langley lies a 43-year-old woman who is dying of cancer and has only weeks to live. Her sister has left her job and home to come and care for her. EI has denied the sister the compassionate care benefit.

Under the sloppy legislation brought in by this Liberal government, a sibling is not considered family. This dying woman has no husband and no children. Her sister is her family. Will the minister of human resources act now and immediately close this loophole so that the--