House of Commons photoWon his last election, in 2011, with 57% of the vote.
David Dingwall September 30th, 2005
Mr. Speaker, it is not normal to charge chewing gum to the Canadian taxpayer.
Former minister David Dingwall resigned following an orgy of reckless spending at taxpayers' expense and after a cloud of suspicion surrounded his past lobbying efforts.
My question is simple. Why should the taxpayers give more money to David Dingwall? Why offer him a golden parachute? Is it to buy his silence?
David Dingwall September 30th, 2005
Mr. Speaker, there are no rules nor guidelines on how much severance David Dingwall will ding the Canadian taxpayer for. We know that he milks the mint with his expenses. We know the Canadian taxpayer was nickeled and dimed during his time there, even charging for a pack of chewing gum.
The Prime Minister's defence of this decadent behaviour speaks volumes as to the arrogance and sense of entitlement that the government exhibits every day.
André Ouellet, another serial expense account abuser, did not receive a cent, a package, when he resigned in disgrace from Canada Post.
Why is a severance package even being contemplated or discussed with David Dingwall?
Premier of Nova Scotia September 29th, 2005
Mr. Speaker, I rise to pay tribute to the great Nova Scotia Premier, John Hamm, who announced his retirement today.
A man of sterling reputation, Premier Hamm has led his province with distinction for six years and the people of Nova Scotia will enjoy the fruits of his labour for generations to come. Through his leadership the finances of the province of Nova Scotia are in the best shape they have been in decades. Under his watch reinvestments were made in health, education and infrastructure.
Among his many accomplishments, his greatest may be his securing of an offshore royalty deal that will ensure a prosperous and bright economic future for the people of Nova Scotia.
The Leader of the Opposition, the Conservative caucus and myself took great pride in working with Premier Hamm and his government.
Perhaps Gentleman John Hamm's greatest legacy will be the integrity and decency he brought to public life and the esteem he brought to the office of the Premier. He accomplished much with humble perseverance, humour and grace. At a time when cynicism about public life is high, John Hamm is leaving office with an ever increasing respect and affection of the people he served.
To John and his wife Genesta and their entire family, we extend our heartfelt thanks and best wishes.
Justice September 28th, 2005
Mr. Speaker, we thank the professor of justice for that little lecture, but he is wrong. The Liberal government's legacy will be leniency on drugs in Canada, soft on drugs and soft on crime generally.
Crystal meth labs are proliferating around the country. This highly available and addictive drug is having a devastating impact on the lives of Canadians. Just this week, a $2.5 million crystal meth lab was shut down, and B.C. municipal leaders are calling for more drug laws as well.
The Prime Minister knows Bill C-17 can actually increase drug use. When will the Prime Minister show some leadership for a change and introduce mandatory minimum sentences for—
Justice September 28th, 2005
Mr. Speaker, the families of the four murdered RCMP officers have called for mandatory prison sentences for marijuana grow ops. There were some members over there who actually believed that at one time. The families also want Bill C-17, the marijuana decriminalization bill, scrapped.
Family spokesman Reverend Schiemann said that the Roszkos of this world are laughing at us. He is worried that the Mayerthorpe tragedy could happen again.
The families say it is time to draw the line, but the government, instead of tightening the drug laws is actually slackening them. Decriminalization is a step in the wrong direction.
When will the Prime Minister commit to shelving Bill C-17 permanently and getting on with tightening our laws in the country?
Gasoline Prices September 27th, 2005
Mr. Speaker, the finance minister knows an awful lot about bouncing around when it comes to his facts. Yesterday the Prime Minister said that Canadians will not get a tax break at the pumps because according to him, gas tax money is going to be sent to cities to pay for good roads.
Well, again the Prime Minister has been caught out being liberal with the truth. The mayor of Winnipeg, Sam Katz, said he cannot use these funds to fix potholes in the roads in his city because the Prime Minister has put stringent conditions on this tax.
Why did the Prime Minister again mislead municipalities and all Canadians by saying he would use the gas tax in the provinces?
Gasoline Prices September 27th, 2005
Mr. Speaker, the government rakes in about $40 million every time the price of gasoline goes up a single cent. In Nova Scotia over the past month the gas prices have fluctuated between $1.12 and $1.49. The finance minister told us yesterday that any increase in gas tax revenue will be redirected to the benefit of all Canadians. Of course, we know what this means, it is the usual pre-election vote buying spree we often see.
Here is an idea. Why not just let Canadians keep more of their hard-earned tax dollars? The Prime Minister does not like paying taxes. Why does he think Canadians do?
Gasoline Prices September 26th, 2005
Mr. Speaker, the finance minister's credibility on surplus as well as corporate tax breaks is pretty speculative. Seniors and Canadians on fixed incomes getting their oil tanks filled this winter, truckers bringing in products on an already razor thin margin and farmers and fishermen bringing in cash crop and catch are all being hit by the increased cost of fuel.
The Prime Minister said that lowering the gas taxes would not be an answer, that this was not what was required. His finance minister said the same thing, that lowering taxes at the pump would not make a difference. It would make a difference for Canadians.
Why are Canadians carrying the costs of these increases in taxes and when will we see some action on the cost of fuel?
Gasoline Prices September 26th, 2005
Mr. Speaker, while the Prime Minister spent the summer burning jet fuel in the Challenger making phony announcements, his cabinet ministers were touring the country in limos tanked up on taxpayer dollars. In contrast, Canadians were lined up at local gas stations getting fleeced by record high fuel costs.
From the cozy confines of 24 Sussex, the Prime Minister continues to dither on tax relief for Canadians. His government is pulling in money hand over fist because of the increased taxes on oil and gas.
When is the government going to give Canadians a tax break and stop gouging them on the high cost of oil and gas?
Justice June 28th, 2005
Mr. Speaker, it has been an excruciating 45 years for the Truscott family in its wait for fundamental justice. In December, the Ontario Court of Appeal issued directions to ensure a fair review of the Truscott case. The court said it would rely on the information provided to Justice Kaufman but not the report itself. Last week, Justice David Doherty expressed concern about the sealing of this important information in one of the most well known criminal cases in Canada.
Why is the Minister of Justice compounding the injustice for the Truscott family, in this case by continuing to assert solicitor-client privilege in refusing to release the Kaufman report?