House of Commons photoLost his last election, in 2015, with 38% of the vote.
Passport Canada May 10th, 2013
Mr. Speaker, we have made it very clear that Canadians are not going to experience any service interruptions whatsoever during this time frame. They will continue to have access to passport services at all of the same locations currently available in the country, and as I indicated, we are actually going to be able to expand those services in the near future.
Passport Canada May 10th, 2013
Mr. Speaker, this is all about improving services for Canadians and making them more convenient and more accessible. In fact, the ministry already determines and issues citizenships, so it only makes sense that the passport program would actually come under the same portfolio.
Over time, we are actually going to be able to improve the service. At service kiosks across this country, Canadians will be able to apply for their passports in a much more timely and broader manner.
Questions on the Order Paper May 6th, 2013
Mr. Speaker, with the changes to the interim federal health program, the government expects to save approximately $100 million over the next five years. If the changes were reversed, the government would lose these savings.
Questions on the Order Paper May 6th, 2013
Mr. Speaker, the loss in savings would be $5.2 million annually, starting in 2014-15.
There are no reductions in the staff at the Citizenship and Immigration Canada call centre.
Citizenship and Immigration May 3rd, 2013
Mr. Speaker, as part of our government's transformational changes to the immigration system and a new improved federal skilled worker program, tomorrow we will begin accepting new applications. The updated selection criteria will help us attract immigrants who will be ready to integrate more rapidly and successfully into Canada's economy, helping spur economic growth and long-term prosperity. This is good news for newcomers and their families who will begin integration into this country with a job and a promise for tomorrow. It is good for this country. It builds on our economy for today and for the long term. We are moving in the right direction.
Anniversary of the Liberation of the Netherlands May 3rd, 2013
Mr. Speaker, as a Canadian of Dutch descent whose parents felt the oppression of Nazi Germany invading their country, I am pleased to rise today to highlight the 68th anniversary of the liberation of the Netherlands.
The struggle to liberate the Netherlands was an important chapter in the events leading to the victory in Europe and the end of the Second World War.
Over nine long and gruelling months, more than 7,600 Canadians gave their lives to help bring freedom and peace to this country.
Whether in my local Lincoln and Welland Regiment, which helped in the liberation at Bergen op Zoom, or in the graveyards of Holton, where a number of members of Parliament went last year and laid a wreath during that ceremony among the rows and rows of Canadian soldiers who sacrificed their lives for liberation, we will always remember with everlasting gratitude the contributions of all who served and all who made the supreme sacrifice.
Let us never forget.
Chernobyl April 26th, 2013
Mr. Speaker, April 26 marks the 27th anniversary of the Chernobyl nuclear disaster. The Ukrainian Canadian Congress will be holding a Chernobyl memorial service this evening at 6 p.m. at St. John the Theologian Ukrainian Catholic Church on Lakeshore Road in St. Catharines. I encourage those who can attend to be there to help remember the events of that tragic day.
The costs of the Chernobyl disaster went far beyond the immediate impact it had on the people who were there on that day in 1986. From first responders, like the firefighters who were exposed to life-threatening levels of radiation, to mere bystanders who lived in nearby towns, several thousand people lost their lives because of the accident.
Latent radiation has also caused abnormally high levels of cancer and birth defects in humans and animals for decades.
Our Canadian government has allocated resources and assistance to help finally contain the Chernobyl site by 2015. I am proud that we are taking much needed action. Ukrainian families have lived with the effects of Chernobyl for far too long.
The lessons of Chernobyl must not be forgotten, and our hearts go out to the families who are still affected by this disaster nearly three decades later.
Privilege April 25th, 2013
Mr. Speaker, the fact is I am the mover of this motion at committee and what the discussion revolved around was acts of terrorism committed by Canadians who had dual citizenship.
I am not sure why or how the opposition, particularly, the Liberal Party of Canada, wants to use this procedural issue to somehow determine that there is a definition of what terrorism is and what it is not. It is very clear. The work we did as a committee, the effort that we put forward, in terms of the amendments and what they speak to, is clearly focused on ensuring that Canadians who are involved in terrorist acts who hold dual citizenship will lose that citizenship if they are convicted of that act.
That is what the bill is about and that is what the amendment is about.
By getting into a procedural discussion around this, I am not surprised that our House Leader has been caught off guard. He would have assumed, like all of us over here, that we are all opposed to it and, therefore, the discussion in the House, from a procedural perspective or from a concurrence perspective, would be focused on the issue of terrorism. Getting caught up in procedure does not do us any good here in the House, in terms of dealing with it. It certainly does not show well to Canadians across this country, that we are not focused on an issue that we in this House can put some resolution to.
Citizenship and Immigration April 22nd, 2013
Mr. Speaker, it is one thing for an opposition member to come into the House to present a case that suggests that the government should change a policy. It is quite another when members of the opposition stand in the House and fearmonger, because that is exactly what is happening here.
The last two times I responded to this question regarding interim federal health, the examples given have been untrue. Those individuals are covered under interim federal health. They are not left at the hospital door. I would ask the member to come to the region of Niagara, because there is no one who has been turned down for health care for the reasons she suggests.
What we do have is this. In December 2012, Nanos completed a poll that suggested that over 70% of Canadians supported the decision the government made that no one in this country should receive more than anyone else, including those who come here as refugees, yet are not true refugees, and try to take advantage of our system. We have stopped that, and we are not going to start it again.
Citizenship and Immigration April 22nd, 2013
Mr. Speaker, I am sure you are, as I am, familiar with staying a little extra time in the House to hear the opposition question the government on the issue of interim federal health. I am going to give a very similar answer to the one I gave late last week because it explains perfectly why the decision was made by this government to move in the direction that it did.
The interim federal health fund was put in place in the late 1950s, and its purpose was to assist in transitional health care for new immigrants and those who came to this country to begin a new life. In the late 1960s and early 1970s when the United Nations began the process of listening to those who were fleeing their countries and seeking refuge, asylum was sought in a number of countries where democracy existed. Canada, at that time, made a determination, for all the right reasons, to take action and participate in the asylum process and allow refugees to come to Canada to begin new lives free from the fear of persecution.
In so doing, we extended interim federal health to those who came here and, through the transition, approval and process of seeking refugee status in Canada, needed something to assist them in the interim to get health care in this country. Once they had met all of the requirements, the provinces and territories extended health cards to them and interim federal health could be removed.
Since that time, over the years it was a system that was equal to and no better than the one for any other Canadian who immigrated here or was born in the country. In fact, I have said before that my mother falls under that category. She does not receive any extended health or dental benefits. She receives what she has earned in this country and certainly accepts that is what is given. However, what she has told me is that it is unfair that people come to this country who are not even true asylum seekers but are here to take advantage of our system, and those individuals for up to 1,000 days on average were receiving extended interim federal health care benefits that included dental care, health care and prescription drugs. It was unfair. It was wrong and we stopped it.
Now true refugees are obviously going to get the benefits extended to other Canadians, but there are people who are not true refugees, as we have seen. A huge percentage, including those from the European Union, took advantage of our system and did not understand why they could not stay here. In fact, 95% of the 5,000 claims from one country in the European Union were withdrawn, abandoned or rejected, but for up to 1,000 days they received health care benefits that exceeded any that Canadian citizens of this country have earned.
We did not allow that to happen then. Canadians are behind us now. In my rebuttal, I am going to prove that Canadians are behind this government in terms of the decision it has made.