House of Commons photo

Crucial Fact

  • His favourite word was regard.

Last in Parliament September 2021, as Conservative MP for Thornhill (Ontario)

Won his last election, in 2019, with 55% of the vote.

Statements in the House

Foreign Affairs April 10th, 2017

Mr. Speaker, the Liberals initially made no mention of Russian complicity in Syria's war crimes, not even of Russia breaking its guarantee to remove chemical weapons from Syria.

Today, the Prime Minister said that he was open to possible new sanctions against Russia. Last week, the foreign affairs committee unanimously recommended expansion of Canada's sanctions regimes to apply to gross violators of human rights.

How long will the Liberals delay in finally imposing meaningful new sanctions on Russia?

National Seal Products Day Act April 5th, 2017

Madam Speaker, I am delighted to rise in support of Bill S-208, a bill to designate May 20 of each year as national seal products day.

I am so pleased to speak in this debate that I went to my closet this morning to retrieve one of my several sealskin ties. I realize that my hon. colleague from Coast of Bays—Central—Notre Dame sported a snappy bow tie when he introduced the bill that was passed in the other place, and is now here for consideration in the House. I have chosen a more substantial piece of neckwear, in square centimetres at least, wonderfully fabricated from the pelt of a harp seal.

I wear it because I am proud that the Conservative Party of Canada is the only party to explicitly state its support of the seal harvest in its official declaration. I recall fondly the first policy conference of our reconstituted party in Montreal in 2005, a conference that I attended as a journalist. The conference so impressed me that barely three weeks later I was a fledgling candidate for the election that followed, which elected the first mandate of Prime Minister Stephen Harper. Members will recall that it took me one more try to join my Conservative colleagues in this House, but that is another story for another day.

The point I was making before interrupting myself was the construction of the sound Conservative policy platform I witnessed at that first policy convention in Montreal in 2005. The policy that was passed, now included in section 123 of the Conservative Party's policy declaration, states unequivocally:

We believe [the Conservative Party of Canada believes] the government must continue to support the Canadian sealing industry by working to eliminate unfair international trade bans on Canadian seal products.

Those unfair international trade practices have taken a terrible toll on Canada's sealing industry, which is a historically important cultural and economic driver in Canada's eastern Arctic and northern communities. It has been, for centuries, an integral part of Canada's rural culture, and a way of life for many thousands of Canadians. Indigenous people have a constitutionally protected right to harvest marine mammals, including seals, as long as the harvest is consistent with responsible conservation practices.

As recently as 2004, seal products in their different forms: meat; oil, which is rich in omega 3 fatty acids; pelts, not only sold as neckties but as jackets, coats, boots, slippers and mittens, all of these products accounted for about $18 million in exports to markets around the world.

Today, unfortunately, seal product exports amount to only several hundred thousand dollars, because of ill-informed, misguided, in some cases, blatantly hypocritical, discriminatory regulations, and outright bans.

In 2010, using justifications built on seal harvest practices that were outlawed decades ago, the European Union banned the import and sales of all seal products. The Fur Institute of Canada, along with successive Canadian governments, Conservative and Liberal, have countered the myths and misrepresentations with clear and accurate facts.

Since 1987, seals have not been hunted until they reach maturity. No other young animals receive the same preferred treatment. Lambs, pigs, calves, and chickens all are slaughtered before maturity.

I used the word myth advisedly. Let me offer a few of the classic myths about the seal harvest along with the realities. The most flagrantly argued and propagandized myth is that the Canadian government still allows sealers to harvest whitecoats, seal pups. In fact, that practice has been illegal since 1987, as is the harvest of adult seals during breeding or birthing times of the year.

Another classic myth is that seals are skinned alive. In fact, a 2002 study carried out by independent veterinarians proved that to be false.

Yet another myth is that Canada's traditional and commercial seal fishery is unsustainable and endangering seal populations. Again, this is absolutely false. Scientists and researchers at Fisheries and Oceans Canada have all the evidence. In fact, the seal population is very healthy and growing, in some cases in overabundant numbers that are seen to be threatening the recovery of overfished, depleted, saltwater, Atlantic groundfish populations, such as the cod.

Harp seals alone, for example, are said to consume more than 12 million tonnes of fish every year, the equivalent of more than 10% of the world's annual commercial wild harvest. As well, the overabundant grey seal population off the Maritimes is also a particular threat to Atlantic cod and salmon, and it is not because they are consuming all that they kill. In fact, the grey seal very often eats only a few bites of an 80 to 100 pound cod, leaving the large wounded fish to die and to waste.

It is also relevant to point out that since the European Union imposed its misguided, misinformed ban on seal product imports and sales, a number of EU member countries have actually authorized the culling of their own seal populations to protect their national fisheries. A spokesman for Canada's fur institute pointed out the cost of those contradictory policies several years ago, saying that the culls in Europe are both hypocritical and wasteful because the killed seals can only be used under EU laws for personal consumption, which is unlikely, and cannot be used as commercial products because of the EU's own ban.

There are two final myths I would like to address. One is that Fisheries and Oceans Canada, which we know well in this House by the acronym, DFO, provides subsidies for the seal hunt. Again, that is outdated. Sealing is, as many of my colleagues have argued, an economically viable industry. All subsidies were ended in 2001, and even that economic assistance was for market and product development. In fact, the Canadian government has provided far less in subsidies to the sealing industry than was recommended by the 1986 Malouf Royal Commission on Seals and the Sealing Industry in Canada.

The final myth that I would like to dispel this evening is that the Canadian seal hunt is rife with brutality and inhumane practices, and that the Department of Fisheries and Oceans does not adequately police or punish illegal hunting activities. The reality is quite the opposite. Fisheries enforcement officers conduct surveillance of the hunt by air and by sea, and with dockside inspection of landing vessels returning from the hunt. As well as this close monitoring of the hunt, infractions of the regulations draw severe penalties, which can include not only very significant fines, but the seizure and forfeiting of fishing vessels and their gear, of catches, and of the sealers' licences.

I know my time is short, so to wrap up, I would like to express again that across Canada's remote northern and coastal communities, sealing is an important traditional way of life and a critical source of income for thousands of families. The seal fishery contributes to the often inconsistent range of income sources in remote fishing communities, and in some years, seal hunt revenues offset poor catches in those other fisheries.

Bill S-208 would impose no direct cost to the federal government and would not create a legal holiday, but designation of May 20 as national seal products day every year would provide invaluable symbolic support of a legitimate, humane, and sustainable fishery. It would provide an annual opportunity for me and my colleagues to once again wear this tangible evidence of a historic past, a worthy present, and a highly sustainable future.

Foreign Affairs April 5th, 2017

Mr. Speaker, the world was reminded yesterday of the devastating, barbaric effects of chemical weapons. In northern Syria, scores of innocent children, women, and men were killed in what many witnesses and officials believe was a sarin gas attack.

While chemical weapons in Syria are unfortunately nothing new, this one was different. People who were outdoors immediately collapsed, suffocating, foaming at the mouth, their pupils reduced to the size of pinpoints. These details are horrific, but they need to be read into the record.

Many believe that Bashar al-Assad has now resorted to using toxic nerve agents against Syria's civilian population. The world must respond. There is no question that yesterday's events constitute a war crime. Assad, and his allies in Tehran and Moscow, must be held to account.

Foreign Investment April 3rd, 2017

Mr. Speaker, for years, federal government departments have been hacked by a network of Chinese hackers.

Recently released documents reveal that China's hack of the National Research Council, in 2014 alone, cost hundreds of millions of dollars. Now the Liberals have approved the sale of this Montreal company and its sensitive defence-related technology.

Why are the Liberals spending many millions of dollars to protect our secrets from the Chinese, and at the same time they are selling our secrets to the Chinese?

Foreign Investment April 3rd, 2017

Mr. Speaker, the Liberals have approved China's acquisition of a Montreal high-tech company. The company's fibre laser technology has several applications, including military development of directed energy weapons. Our previous Conservative government had blocked the deal on the national security advice of National Defence and CSIS. Now the Liberals claim they have attached unexplained conditions to the sale, but do the Liberals realize that in their rush to please China, they are putting the security of Canada and our allies at risk?

Attack on the Parliament of the United Kingdom March 22nd, 2017

Mr. Speaker, as we have heard, there has been an attack on our mother parliament in Great Britain. There are reports of multiple casualties, including a police officer, in what is being considered a terrorist attack.

While the details are still being confirmed, what is known is that today there has been an attack on democracy.

Canada and the United Kingdom share many links, bonds, and traditions, including our head of state, our system of government, and now, unfortunately, modern attacks on our parliaments.

The scenes out of London will no doubt bring back dark memories for many of us here in the House today. Our thoughts and prayers are with our colleagues across the Atlantic. We thank the police and the security forces that defend these houses of parliament, those in the U.K., and all houses of democracy around the world.

Operation UNIFIER March 21st, 2017

Mr. Chair, my hon. colleague is clear that members on both sides of this House are very passionate in their statements in support for Ukraine. We in the official opposition are relieved that the government finally, after waiting for almost a year to respond to the questions and appeals from the Government of Ukraine, has seen an extension of Operation Unifier, which, as my colleague said, is what our Conservative government initiated.

Our disappointment springs from the fact that it is only what our government initiated under a very different time, when we thought we had not one, but two agreements, the Minsk agreements, to create a ceasefire, to create a negotiated settlement, and ultimately a withdrawal of the Russian forces that are directing the so-called insurgency.

I would ask my colleague how he can justify, given the new deadly realities of the Russian surge in the last couple of months in eastern Ukraine, the resupply of armaments, weapons, materiel, and direction in not meeting the request from the Government of Ukraine for not only an extension of Operation Unifier, but an expansion for the provisions, the supply of defensive armaments—

Operation UNIFIER March 20th, 2017

Mr. Chair, I would like to thank my hon. colleague for his collegiality on the various travels of our House standing committee on foreign affairs, especially most recently in eastern Europe, where we visited Ukraine, Latvia, Poland, and Kazakstan.

I would like to ask him a question based on one of the many meetings and briefings we experienced.

In several interactions with representatives of the Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe, the OSCE, they were appealing, almost begging, for more funds to allow not only monitoring on both sides of the line of contact in eastern Ukraine, but to expand their operations along the Russian border to better monitor what Russia is sending into eastern Ukraine in the way of fuel, armaments, and men. Would he advise his Liberal government that perhaps it is time to step up and provide some additional funding to the OSCE to carry out these important monitoring operations?

Operation UNIFIER March 20th, 2017

Madam Chair, indeed I will give the member a chance to continue, with his answer to my question.

In describing this recent deadly, bloody, destructive surge by the Russian-directed forces in eastern Ukraine, my colleague seems to be making the arguments that we on this side of the House have been making for responding to Ukraine's appeal for an expansion of Operation Unifier, and for the defence of lethal weapons, the anti-tank, anti-armoured mobile artillery and satellite imagery, which the government in Kyiv has been so passionately requesting discretely, given the diplomatic appreciation of the basic extension of Operation Unifier. However, my colleague's remarks would seem to be supporting the feeling on this side of the House that we should be responding with much more to the request of the government of Ukraine.

Operation UNIFIER March 20th, 2017

Madam Chair, I thank my hon. colleague for a very reasonable question. In fact it is true, and had I had more time I would have mentioned that the mistakes of one government with regard to names left off the list of sanctioned individuals should not be used as an excuse by the current government to continue to keep those names off the list. Igor Sechin is a prime example. As the brutal left-hand man of Vladimir Putin and the head of Russia's oil company, he has in fact, just in the last couple of months, managed to sell 20% of that company, despite U.S. and other sanctions, through a very dark series of negotiated deals. That is exactly why I would suggest that the names of Vladimir Yakunin and Igor Sechin be considered by the government today to be added to the list of those sanctioned Russian individuals.