House of Commons photoWon her last election, in 2015, with 70% of the vote.
Child Care May 19th, 2005
Mr. Speaker, the Liberals' two tier child care system does not respect the needs of the majority of parents. The Conservative Party program is truly universal. Cash would go to every child and we would financially empower every family.
Would the minister explain why he is unwilling to support every child and every family in our country?
Child Care May 19th, 2005
Mr. Speaker, almost 100% of working moms and dads have said that they want choice in child care. The premier of New Brunswick has also asked for choice in child care. Yet the Liberals refuse to offer choice.
Make no mistake that the Liberals have created a two tier child care system, one tier for the Liberal plan, and a tier for the rest who are forced to fend for themselves, money for some and nothing for most.
Could the minister explain why he is creating a two tier system?
Government of Canada May 13th, 2005
Mr. Speaker, in 1838 Lord Durham, on commission from Queen Victoria, wrote that in order to maintain stability in the Canadian colonies, the government must be held accountable to the people who elect it by retaining the confidence of the House. This principle of responsible government is the democratic foundation upon which this country was founded.
The Prime Minister is no longer governing with the consent of the governed, which is the traditional test of legitimacy according to our Constitution. His attempts to delay another confidence motion mocks our democracy, smacks of desperation and underlies the lack of legitimacy of his government.
Political legitimacy is delegated in the highest regard to this House by the citizens of this country. To retain any authority to govern that he might once have had, the Prime Minister must table a confidence motion that can be voted upon by all representatives of the people, not just at his own convenience.
Social Development May 10th, 2005
Mr. Speaker, this is about equality and choice and the government is discriminating against certain parents.
Our party has spoken to parents from coast to coast. What they are asking for is a workable program that financially empowers them with choice and provides their children with the tools they need to succeed. In fact, studies have shown that almost all working parents would stay at home part time if they could afford to.
Why do the Liberals refuse to financially empower all parents equally?
Social Development May 10th, 2005
Mr. Speaker, the Conservative Party will honour the child care agreements with the provinces; however, our party is willing to go one step further and put money directly into the hands of parents so they can make their own child care choices.
The difference between the Liberals and the Conservatives is that the Conservative Party supports equality and choice. Why is there not one red cent of the $5 billion Liberal day care scheme going to parents who choose to stay at home with their children or choose other child care options?
The Budget May 2nd, 2005
Mr. Speaker, all the expenditures associated with this new deal between the Liberal Party and the NDP have to do with areas of provincial jurisdiction. Yet no one asked the provinces what their priorities were.
Why is the Minister of Finance making empty election promises, instead of giving the money back to the provinces, thereby eliminating the fiscal imbalance?
The Budget May 2nd, 2005
Mr. Speaker, Don Drummond, the chief economist for the TD Bank and the Prime Minister's own former deputy minister of finance said today that the $4.6 billion in new spending will make it harder for Ottawa to offer personal income tax breaks over the next five years.
The finance minister himself has admitted tax cuts mean future jobs for Canadians.
Why are the finance minister and the Prime Minister jeopardizing the economic future for my generation?
RCMP and Law Enforcement in Canada April 12th, 2005
Mr. Chair, over the last few weeks I have spoken to the RCMP about this issue and I have learned a great deal about it. I was not aware of the great impact of this drug trade and this growing drug problem in our community. It is a huge problem in high schools, but unfortunately I have to say that it is also a huge problem in junior high schools and middle schools. Very young children are using this. Children up to university age use it. My understanding is that the problem with this drug is that it is so easily accessible in terms of the materials needed to produce it.
Of course, having said that it is very cheap to make, I note that it is also easy to distribute and cheap to buy. As my hon. colleague mentioned, it is also extremely addictive. It is a huge problem in my riding as well. Increasingly I have parents coming into my riding office to talk about the problems in their own communities and high schools. This is something we absolutely need to look at, particularly along the lines of a national drug strategy, which we have spoken about before.
RCMP and Law Enforcement in Canada April 12th, 2005
Mr. Chair, just this weekend I had an opportunity to talk to the RCMP officers in my riding. The issue they spoke most passionately about was the need for funding.
The hon. member for Provencher has mentioned how many of these officers work in our communities, communities like mine, like Spruce Grove and Stoney Plain. They volunteer and coach hockey in the community. They work countless hours as volunteers in the community, adding to the community, and they love their jobs and their communities, but much of the work they do with volunteer organizations in our communities of Spruce Grove and Stoney Plain is unpaid.
While they love their jobs, it is important that we find the funding necessary to be able to retain and attract the good people that we have in the RCMP force today. As I said earlier, just in my riding alone the town of Stoney Plain requires at least another two to three more officers and the city of Spruce Grove is looking to replace and supplement another four to six officers.
I think the issue of funding is the most particularly pressing issue right now.
RCMP and Law Enforcement in Canada April 12th, 2005
Mr. Chair, I am proud to take part in this debate to pay tribute to the four fallen RCMP officers from my home province of Alberta and discuss ways of preventing similar tragedies from happening in the future.
I want to thank my colleague from Yellowhead for pushing to make sure this debate happened today. He knows full well that safety and security are fundamental principles that must guide this debate as we pay tribute to the fallen, seek answers as to why this has happened, and search for new and innovative ways to deal with the realities of 21st century law enforcement.
Since the 1880s, a total of 191 officers have died in the line of duty, yet only 59 of them have died for the most tragic reason of all: simply because they were targets when they proudly wore the uniform of our nation's national police force. The murders of Constables Peter Schiemann, Anthony Gordon, Leo Johnston and Brock Myrol happened for just that reason.
My riding in the community of Stoney Plain was particularly hard hit because one of those brave officers was one of our own. Constable Peter Schiemann is fondly remembered by all in my constituency of Edmonton—Spruce Grove.
However, it has also been a time when our community has come together in both grief and hope. The town of Stoney Plain itself has been an example of the heart and compassion that has emerged from this tragedy. I had the great privilege of being in Stoney Plain to attend the funeral service for fallen RCMP Constable Peter Schiemann. He is our hero and he is our friend.
It was wonderful to hear his brother and sister, Michael and Julia, talk about their brother, share their memories with us and assure us of the love and faith that Peter had in God and in his fellow RCMP colleagues. I know the Schiemann family has been touched by the support received. This is clearly a Canadian tragedy and many people from across this country want to contribute to the healing process. From this, we must move forward. We must look for ways to prevent this from happening again so that the deaths of our officers did not occur in vain.
When I was speaking to RCMP officers in my riding, they told me that the killer, James Roszko, represents a larger problem that is facing all police officers today. RCMP and law enforcement officers increasingly encounter mental health issues on the job, yet they have limited power to act in these types of situations and limited resources for dealing with this difficult community challenge. They expressed to me the need for more funding and for support for community programs to deal with mental health issues.
There is no doubt that federal funding for mental health issues is lacking. This is inexcusable. The officers want the tools to work with these individuals, not simply the tools to investigate the unfortunate aftermath that neglect often leads to.
The location of this crime also provides an unfortunate glimpse into the dark world of the illicit drug trade. Marijuana grow operations have become a low risk, high profit industry in Alberta and indeed all of Canada. In the face of this crime, my constituents want to know why we do not have a national drug strategy.
I would also like to raise the manpower issue as the top concern of my constituents and, indeed, small communities across the country. Funding for the RCMP continues to remain stagnant and that directly translates into less protection for our neighbours, families and friends and into increased risks for our officers. For example, in Stoney Plain alone we could use another three to four officers. Spruce Grove would like to have at least another four to six officers.
We have to find ways to properly fund our forces so they are there when we need them most. It is hard to believe that we have to go back years to find a time when funding was actually substantially increased to these units.
Canada's laws have to be enforced, but we must also not forget the issues that these brave officers have once again brought to our attention: the issues of mental illness, gun control, marijuana grow operations, and increased funding for the RCMP.
Unlike the Liberal Party of Canada, we do not support the decriminalization of marijuana, nor do we defend a tragically failing long gun registry.
We have to act before it is too late. We must increase the size of our police forces in small communities. We must enforce our national laws against grow operations. We must look for ways to intervene before these unthinkable acts occur. That is our responsibility to the Canadian people and to our fallen heroes.