House of Commons photo

Crucial Fact

  • Her favourite word was question.

Last in Parliament March 2011, as Liberal MP for Willowdale (Ontario)

Lost her last election, in 2011, with 40% of the vote.

Statements in the House

Government Communications October 2nd, 2009

Mr. Speaker, apparently the minister could not answer a question so simple that every school kid in this country could answer. Look at the flag. The Canadian national colours are red and white, and I understand that it might be frustrating for the minister that they are not the same as his Conservative political party colours, but covering taxpayer paid, partisan, pat on the back government ads and websites in Conservative Party blue is wrong and it is an abuse of taxpayers' money. When will it stop?

Government Communications October 2nd, 2009

Mr. Speaker, I have a very simple question for the President of the Treasury Board given that he is the minister responsible for the government communications file. It is a very simple question.

Could he tell us what the national colours of Canada are?

The Economy September 29th, 2009

Mr. Speaker, I asked for a number and clearly got no number.

We have been asking for numbers for months now. We still do not have the numbers for fiscal 2008-09. We do not have last year's numbers, let alone the numbers for this most recent overload of taxpayer paid pat-themselves-on-the-back advertising.

Either it is fiscal incompetence or the government is trying to hide something. Could the member confirm that at the very least the government spent over a million dollars in one day yesterday alone?

The Economy September 29th, 2009

Mr. Speaker, I was wondering if someone in the government could please tell us how much taxpayer money has been spent on the total ad campaign for the budget and the economic plan, and by that I mean all of the spending up to and including the current third report.

The Economy September 28th, 2009

Mr. Speaker, I was actually prepared to respond to at least an attempt at an answer, but that was not even an attempt at one.

I will volunteer that hastily making drastic changes to the website in the middle of the night sure looks like a guilty kid trying to cover his tracks.

Why will the government not admit that it got its hands caught in a taxpayer-paid cookie jar?

The Economy September 28th, 2009

Mr. Speaker, last Monday, someone removed dozens of photos of the Prime Minister from the website for the economic action plan. Why?

Made in Canada Act September 18th, 2009

Mr. Speaker, I am rising today in response to the proposed Bill C-392, An Act respecting the use of government procurements and transfers to promote economic development.

I appreciate the efforts of my colleague from the NDP and I will acknowledge good intentions. I believe firmly that credit is due when it is appropriate, and I do appreciate good intentions.

However, this proposal, in effect, is a vague, protectionist and retaliatory response. It is an attempt at a response to the buy American provisions in the United States which we, as a group of parliamentarians, have vehemently opposed for some time now.

I wish to stand here today to show our lack of support for this particular bill. Let me add a little bit of context to our position on this. The buy American provisions were announced some time ago and are clearly creating significant challenges for Canadian businesses and therefore for Canadian jobs.

As much as I might have some agreement with some of the interventions from my colleagues across the way, I hate to inform them that I am not in fact part of their current coalition and I will take significant exception to some of what they said.

The challenge that we are facing now requires results. It does not require letters and words. So far, from the Conservative government that we have at the moment and since the buy American provisions were announced, we have seen nothing but letters, some of which have gone unanswered and words. This past week alone we have seen another photo op with the President of the United States, who once again acknowledged, in certain words, that the buy American provisions were not something that he felt were that important from a Canadian perspective, and that we really ought to focus on things of a more significant nature. From a Canadian perspective, these buy American provisions are in fact very important and very damaging. We need far more than a photo op and words and letters.

What we needed, and still need because we continue to not see any results, was a recognition of the impacts of the buy American provisions. Although the federal government is subject to NAFTA, the individual states of the United States and the many municipalities are not. The effect of the buy American policy, and not even just the provisions but the sentiment, has created significant efforts on the part of many states and municipalities in the United States to source specifically from the United States, which, as I have said, has created a real challenge for many Canadian businesses and therefore Canadian jobs.

The answer is not, at the top, to make noise and to protest weakly. The answer should have been and continues to be to have people on the ground in the United States, not just in Washington but at the various state levels and the municipalities, working with those people to ensure that Canadian businesses and Canadian jobs were not going to be sacrificed and put at risk because of the buy American provisions.

I feel very strongly in representing the Liberal Party saying that we stand for free trade. We stand against protectionism. We stand for the long-term economic benefits of free trade and against protectionism, and that one cannot do a knee-jerk reaction at the expense of long-term economic benefits.

We are critical of the buy American provisions, very much so. I, as a Liberal on this side of the House in opposition, am also very critical of the complete lack of results that we have seen from the Conservative government.

It is my distinct recollection that the other opposition parties have also been critical of the buy American provisions and have also been very critical of the lack of results seen from the current government.

How on earth does this response sound: “We do not like buy American. We want you to stop the buy American provisions or we are just going to do the same thing”? It sounds frightfully like children in a sandbox saying, “You have now thrown sand me, so I am going to throw sand at you”.

Retaliation does not good policy make. Simply recognizing the circumstances that we are now in, even if there were value to this, which I question, the appearance of having us as Canadians who as parliamentarians appear to have been unanimous in our critique and our criticism of the buy American provisions to simply even be seen to be promoting buy Canadian as a retaliatory measure would make absolutely no sense, and in fact would be somewhat embarrassing, frankly, for us as Canadian parliamentarians.

I would recommend that my hon. colleague think very seriously about moving this forward. I invite her to engage in a discussion on how we can achieve solid results collectively and ensure that the government finally works to achieve some results in challenging the buy American provisions.

However, this particular bill does absolutely nothing of the kind. On the contrary, it really diminishes our ability, when we are engaging with the Americans, to encourage them to reduce their buy American provisions.

Made in Canada Act September 18th, 2009

Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the intentions, but how on earth can we possibly continue to stand and rally against the buy American provisions, while at the same time support a buy Canadian provision? How can she possibly support that at this point in time?

Canada-U.S. Relations September 16th, 2009

Mr. Speaker, again I repeat, it is not words but action we want from the United States. That is not how it works in the United States. It is not enough to write letters, to have nice words and provide weak protest. It was 42 minutes with the President, giving the Prime Minister a photo op, and a few pat on the back words, but that is it.

We should have had people on the ground right from the beginning, not only our premiers and territorial leaders but in the United States, and not just in Washington but working with those individual states and municipalities, which are not bound by NAFTA.

When can we expect results? Only when it is too late?

Canada-U.S. Relations September 16th, 2009

Mr. Speaker, it has now been months and months, yet we have seen no change in the protectionist buy American provisions that are killing Canadian jobs.

A few diplomatic words from the President do not actually change any facts. Indeed, all we see are words in unanswered letters and photo ops, but it is not even federal. A major problem is the individual states and municipalities, which are outside of NAFTA.

What specific results, not words, could the minister report to us from Washington?