Ted Hsu

[Questions on the Order Paper, May 12th, 2014]

With regard to the recent sale of crown land owned by Correctional Service of Canada, in the amount of 1,554.48 square meters, located on Frontenac Institute in Kingston, Ontario: (a) who is the purchaser; (b) what is the purchase price; (c) what is the closing date of the transaction; (d) what were all of the measures taken to respect the Commissioner’s Directive for Real Property for Correctional Service Canada, in particular the statement, under Principles, that “acquisition and disposal of real property assets will be done in a fair and open manner, which shall include public consultation”; (e) what was the first date of any communications regarding the sale of this land between the government and the purchaser; (f) what was the first date of any communications regarding the sale of this land between the government and parties who expressed interest but ultimately did not purchase the land; and (g) what was the first date of any communications regarding the sale of this land between the government and parties other than those in (e) and (f)?

[Liberal Party of Canada, May 12th, 2014]

Mr. Speaker, Arnold Chan has been nominated as the Liberal candidate in Scarborough—Agincourt for the by-election to be held on June 30.

Arnold has deep roots in the riding, having grown up and gone to school in one of the most diverse communities, which is also home to one of the largest Chinese-Canadian populations in the country. Arnold has had a distinguished career as a lawyer and a community volunteer. He will be a strong voice on issues such as jobs, the economy, immigration, and trade, and will ensure that the people of Scarborough—Agincourt are well represented in Ottawa.

Arnold will be supported by his family and three children, and he understands the need to help the middle class through hope and hard work.

We look forward, with the support of the people of Scarborough—Agincourt, to welcoming Arnold Chan to the Liberal caucus.

[Safeguarding Canada's Seas and Skies Act, May 8th, 2014]

Mr. Speaker, the hon. member for Ottawa South may know that the CN main line passes through my riding of Kingston and the Islands. I remember recently looking at the trains with my young daughter and telling her which cars contained what. I remember telling her that many cars were full of oil. The composition of the trains has certainly changed in the last few years.

Could the Liberal critic for transport tell my constituents in Kingston and the Islands what effect better regulations and better surveillance and auditing of Canada's rail system would mean to the people who live along that rail line?

[Petitions, May 6th, 2014]

Mr. Speaker, I have a petition from constituents in Kingston and the Islands who have asked the House of Commons to undertake public consultations regarding proportional representation, in order to amend the Canada Elections Act.

[Infrastructure, May 1st, 2014]

Mr. Speaker, freight trains that now include car after car of oil tankers pass through my home of Kingston and the Islands. The CN main line intersects John Counter Boulevard, which has become a major east-west artery for Kingston. To handle traffic and ensure safety, Kingston is ready to build an overpass to replace the level crossing.

Dawson Point Road leads up to the winter dock for the ferry connecting Wolfe Island with the mainland. It needs to be rebuilt, and that is a priority for the island.

Since last fall, municipalities have pressed for information on how to apply for infrastructure funding from the new Building Canada fund. Now, finally, we know that applications for the fund will go through the Ontario Ministry of Infrastructure, but the federal government still has to work out implementation with the provinces. Fourteen months after the Building Canada fund announcement in budget 2013, municipalities are still waiting to put their shovels into the ground. We have missed this construction season and the jobs that come with it. Let us think about that and let us think about that the next time we are stuck in traffic.

[Protecting Canadians from Online Crime Act, April 28th, 2014]

Mr. Speaker, my colleague from Esquimalt—Juan de Fuca is right that this bill is a bit of an omnibus bill. It covers everything from terrorism to telemarketing, cable stealing and hate speech.

I wonder if the member, who is very rightly concerned about the overlap between this bill and his private member's bill, Bill C-279, which is stuck in the Senate, thinks that splitting off all the provisions that relate to cyberbullying into a separate bill, which would allow the committee to leave aside examining the other parts of the bill, would be a better strategy to at least pass part of the bill and make sure it is coordinated with his own private member's bill and get it through the Senate before we rise for the summer.

[Business of Supply, April 10th, 2014]

Mr. Speaker, the minister came up and brought a motion imposing time allocation after only three speakers. I think we could have had more than three speakers.

Regarding the other things, I would say that there are some bills we have to pass through to fix the Conservatives' mistake and get the grain to ports on the west coast. That is something we undoubtedly have to speed through.

However, when we are talking about the foundational institutions of our democracy, in how we run elections, surely we could let more members of Parliament speak.

[Business of Supply, April 10th, 2014]

Mr. Speaker, during this debate today, we have heard from the members for Western Arctic and Bonavista—Gander—Grand Falls—Windsor. They are from far-flung regions of the country. That is why we have debate and why we should allow all members of Parliament to speak when we are discussing issues related to the foundations of our democracy, as in how to run elections.

The last two questioners are excellent examples of why it is important to hear members of Parliament from all parts of Canada.

When we ask questions about Bill C-23 in question period, we hear pretty much uniquely from the Minister of State for Democratic Reform, who represents a suburb of Ottawa. We keep hearing from him over and over again. That is not as good as hearing from members who represent all parts of Canada.

[Business of Supply, April 10th, 2014]

Mr. Speaker, I will give the House another fine example of what the member for Western Arctic is talking about.

The health card belonging to the sponsor of this motion, the member for Bonavista—Gander—Grand Falls—Windsor, does not have his address. His driver's licence has a P.O. box. If when he went to vote the officials were to follow the rules, they would say, “Sorry, you do not have something that proves where you live”. There would be 20 people there saying, “This is my member of Parliament. I know that person lives here and is my member of Parliament. You have got to let him vote”. This is the sort of thing that Bill C-23 overlooks. It is a fine example of how even a member of Parliament does not have the identification to officially prove his residence. Therefore, there has to be some sort of allowance for vouching.

[Business of Supply, April 10th, 2014]

Mr. Speaker, one thing we discovered in talking to people in the last election is that it is hard for students to prove where they live. It is easy for people to prove their identity. Lots of people have pieces of ID with their picture and their name. It is quite a bit harder to prove where one lives. We discovered that a lot of students and young people do not have easy access to that identification. That example is an excellent one.

The member may or may not know that when it comes to the commissioner of elections, I have mentioned it a number of times and it has been mentioned in the press as well, we know that one of the problems with Bill C-23 is that the commissioner does not have the ability to compel witnesses. For example, when we found out that somebody impersonated my campaign manager in my riding, even with those pieces of information we had it was hard for the commissioner to force somebody to testify. We know that voters were misled and told to go to a different poll very far away from where they lived. The commissioner does not have the power to compel witnesses to figure out who did that.