House of Commons photo

Crucial Fact

  • Her favourite word was jobs.

Last in Parliament October 2019, as NDP MP for Essex (Ontario)

Lost her last election, in 2021, with 32% of the vote.

Statements in the House

International Trade November 19th, 2018

Mr. Speaker, what the Liberals are doing is not working, and the response tells me that they are not listening and that, in fact, they are willing to let the house burn down to the ground around them and leave the ashes, with no plan going forward. Talking points are not going to cut it. We are in an emergency situation in this country, and it is not surprising that the response we get tonight from the parliamentary secretary is not actually an answer to the question I asked, the question that is on the minds of many Canadians and the question that others in this House believe is where we need to go.

Small businesses cannot navigate the system and cannot access the money. They do not have the resources to dedicate staff to understanding these programs. They do not want loans from BDC and EDC. They can get loans down the street at their own local lenders. They want the government to negotiate an end to the steel and aluminum tariffs.

Canadians do not want the government to sign on to the USMCA and lose our greatest piece of leverage in a shot to get rid of these tariffs. If we do not get rid of these tariffs, we will see the decimation of our manufacturing sector. The Liberals are asleep at the wheel.

Once again, will they stand with us and not sign the agreement until the tariffs are removed?

International Trade November 19th, 2018

Mr. Speaker, when I rose months ago, my question for the Prime Minister was about the devastating impact the steel and aluminum tariffs would have on working people in Canada. Unfortunately, we are living through the fallout of the Liberals' failure to have a plan that would actually help working people. It is no surprise though. The Liberals continue to profess their love for workers and the middle class at the same time as we see jobs bleeding out of our country because of steel and aluminum tariffs.

No one believes we are dealing with a logical approach and when it comes to President Trump, no one believes it is an easy task. However, the Liberal line of tariffs being completely separate is complete and utter nonsense. No one believes that. If we were to ask anyone in the states or ask the president himself if these tariffs were separate from the renegotiation of NAFTA, the response would be a resounding no. They believe these tariffs are directly tied. In fact, in the new USMCA, we see the tariffs being tied to the auto sector and mention of section 232 throughout the agreement.

This is a very hot topic in my riding of Essex, where we have the manufacturing sector. We also have a wonderful steel manufacturer. This steel manufacturer, a local business owner who provides excellent jobs in one of the communities I represent, said that the tariff situation was like the Liberals standing in a burning house, with people saying that the fire department should be called, that they need help and the Liberals telling them that they should not to worry, that they should stay in the house, that it will be all right. However, we all see that the house is burning down as they sit, not helping businesses and workers who are in a desperate situation.

When I asked that question, the government told us it was ready for the worst case scenario. We now know that is about as far away from the truth as a Donald Trump tweet. What is happening on the ground is workers are being laid off. There are down weeks happening in our country. In fact, in Ottawa this month, a business that had operated since the 1970s closed its doors. This is just the cusp of where we are going. Ford Motor Company has reported it has lost $1 billion due to these tariffs. People will be laid off as a result. No large manufacturing corporation that has a footprint in Canada can continue with billion dollar losses over less than a year.

The Liberals like to point to the auto gains in the USMCA, but they seem to be conveniently forgetting that cars are made of steel and aluminum. This is the underpinning of this sector. As long as these tariffs are in place, our entire manufacturing sector is under direct threat. We are in an emergency situation. Business after business has come before the trade committee, under our NDP-led tariff study, and told us of the many issues with the supposed relief package. That money, instead of being kept separately and being able to support businesses and people on the ground, is just going into the general coffers. In fact a month ago, there was a report of $11,000 being paid out of the $375 million collected. Where is this money going? This money is not making its way to shops on the ground or to people on the ground who need this help.

My call tonight is this. Will the Liberals join the NDP call, and in fact all sides of the House, because the Conservative deputy leader has also agreed, to not sign us on to the USMCA until these tariffs are removed?

International Trade November 8th, 2018

Mr. Speaker, yesterday the Prime Minister decided he will not take part in the signing of the USMCA alongside Donald Trump if tariffs are still in place. How exactly is this defending Canadian jobs? Is the Prime Minister so vain that he thinks depriving the U.S. of his presence in a photo-op is the best trade strategy to get rid of the tariffs? Make no mistake, we are still signing it. He just does not want his picture doing it. Who can blame him? I would not want my picture taken signing it either.

These tariffs are killing jobs. Will the Prime Minister finally do the right thing and not sign the agreement until the tariffs are removed?

Canada-Israel Free Trade Agreement Implementation Act November 7th, 2018

Mr. Speaker, what the member stated is true. This is Canada's position because we are a party to UN Security Council resolution 2334 that we signed in 2016, which includes two very important statements. The first is that we reaffirm “that the establishment by Israel of settlements in the Palestinian territory occupied since 1967, including East Jerusalem, has no legal validity and constitutes a flagrant violation under international law and a major obstacle to the achievement of the two-State solution and a just, lasting and comprehensive peace”. It also calls on states to bear in mind the first paragraph of the resolution, calling on them “to distinguish, in their relevant dealings, between the territory of the State of Israel and the territories occupied since 1967”.

One amendment New Democrats will be proposing is something that we saw in the EU-Israel agreement, namely, recognition of the distinction made in this Security Council resolution, as well as human rights provisions that can and should be included in this agreement.

Canada-Israel Free Trade Agreement Implementation Act November 7th, 2018

Mr. Speaker, I do not think I need to enlighten the member. We supported the Canada-Ukraine deal in this Parliament and another, technical trade bill, so I would invite the member to look at the record of what the NDP has been doing in Parliament in regard to trade.

I will say, though, that details matter in agreements and I am so proud of New Democrats and the way we look at trade agreements in their entirety. We take the time to ensure that we understand what is in them and the impact they will have on Canadians. There are a lot of questions that Canadians should be asking about the types of trade agreements being signed and whether they are bringing opportunities to us. It is unfortunate that the Liberals, much like the Conservatives, are not in favour of having an accounting of where we are at with trade agreements from years past. It is something critical that we do to ensure that we are trading responsibly.

I would encourage the member to speak to members at the trade committee and support the amendments that New Democrats will be bringing forward that will reflect transparency, as well as human rights, which are critical in this particular agreement.

Canada-Israel Free Trade Agreement Implementation Act November 7th, 2018

Madam Speaker, I am pleased to rise to speak to Bill C-85, an act to amend the Canada-Israel Free Trade Agreement Implementation Act and to make related amendments to other acts.

There are many elements to any trade deal that can make them extremely complex, and they can be massive documents. However, today I want to focus on gender, labour and the important human rights obligations that this deal can address.

The original Canada-Israel FTA was negotiated in 1993, and has been expanded three times over the last 25 years. The last revision or modernization of this agreement was negotiated by the previous Conservative government and is now being brought into force legislatively by the Liberals, much like the original NAFTA deal and the recent CETA and CPTPP agreements.

New Democrats are supportive of the fact that this deal has a number of positive issues. One of them is that it would create more favourable conditions for exporters through important non-tariff commitments. On the trade committee we hear about non-tariff barriers far more than we hear about tariffs, as Canada is largely becoming tariff-free with the globe. It really is non-tariff barriers that we need to address to ensure that trade is flowing.

It would establish mechanisms whereby both nations can co-operate to resolve unjustified non-tariff barriers. It has provisions related to the protection and enforcement of intellectual property rights. It would create potential new and improved market access for Canada, particularly in the areas of agriculture, agri-food, fish and seafood products. There are changes to the rules of origin that reflect many aspects of Canada's current approach, including recognizing the presence of global value chains and the integrated nation of North American production, as well as streamlining the provisions for obtaining preferential tariff treatment.

The environment chapter is another first for Israel and would ensure environmental protections are maintained with recourse to a chapter-specific dispute resolution practice.

There is a chapter on small and medium-sized enterprises that would improve transparency and commit both parties to co-operate with a view to removing barriers and improving access for SMEs to engage in trade. It is widely understood that we need greater supports for our domestic exporters to take advantage of this. Certainly, again at the trade committee, we hear consistently that SMEs are not able to trade in the same way that large players are.

For every FTA that we are signing, our exports are decreasing with the country that we are signing. I point to the recent signing of CETA. A year on from the signing of CETA, our exports have decreased. Therefore, there are major fundamental issues that need to be addressed with the types of trade agreements that we are creating and signing onto, if they are not actually creating opportunities for Canadian businesses.

The modernized CIFTA would provide new and improved market access for virtually 100%, up from 90%, of current exports of agricultural, agri-food, fish and seafood products. In the agriculture and agri-food sector, 92% of Canadian exports would enter Israel duty-free, in unlimited quantities, under the modernized CIFTA, which is up from a current level of 83%. The agreement offers the potential for deeper, broader and more prosperous commercial relationships between our two countries. Because of these provisions, New Democrats will support this bill at second reading, but will make constructive suggestions to include crucial human rights elements, and we hope that the Liberals and Conservatives will accept our amendments at committee.

I want to talk about social issues. We are pleased with the new language and the representation of more social aspects of the deal, such as the environment, small business, corporate social responsibility, labour and gender. However, we cannot understand why, with such a progressive trade agenda for the current government, that it would not have these provisions within the text of the agreement and fully enforceable.

I want to talk a bit about corporate social responsibility. The article references again voluntary OECD guidelines for multinational enterprises that are a broad application to this agreement. This is a good first step. However, with respect to this clause, the New Democrats would prefer to see a corporate social responsibility chapter that has some enforceability and some teeth to it. When corporate social responsibility is only voluntary, how can the government plan to hold corporations to account? Those who violate human rights make a bigger profit when there is no one there to ensure that they are not violating rights. Therefore, we have to ask ourselves why this provision is only voluntary.

As I mentioned, this was the Conservative-negotiated deal, but the Liberals were truly concerned with the provisions. They could have negotiated much stronger language, as was done in the European Union-Israel trade agreement, which states:

Relations between the Parties, as well as all the provisions of the Agreement itself, shall be based on respect for human rights and democratic principles, which guides their internal and international policy and constitutes an essential element of this Agreement.

I have to ask why the government did not bother to include a similar general line, at the very least, on human rights provisions in this agreement.

I want to talk a bit about the gender chapter. The NDP would like to emphasize, as we have in other trade agreements, that the provisions around gender and equality cannot be just limited to one chapter, especially when it is unenforceable.

As in the international trade committee, where I am vice-chair, and in committee meetings regarding other trade deals, OXFAM Canada came and presented. It called the mainstreaming of gender rights throughout the entirety of this FTA the path that we need to be on, not only relegating to one small chapter.

Gender equality does not only concern issues of women entrepreneurs and business owners. Labour rights must also address injustices to women, like pay inequity, child labour and poor working conditions.

The NDP believes that for an agreement to be truly progressive when it comes to gender rights, it must address the systemic inequalities for all women.

We also believe that both gender analysis and gender impact assessment must be applied to all trade agreements and we would like to see this in the updated CIFTA. Every trade agreement that we sign should build on the previous gender provisions that we have achieved in other deals.

I want to talk a bit about labour. We are pleased to see that there is a labour chapter, which is a first for Israel in a free trade agreement. This would help to ensure that high labour standards are maintained, with recourse to labour-specific, enforceable, binding dispute settlement mechanisms where non-compliance can lead to monetary penalties.

The Canadian Labour Congress has also made it clear that in order to equally raise labour standards and all standards in an FTA, the labour chapter must include the International Labour Organization's eight core conventions and adhere to its decent work agenda. It also must include the creation of an independent labour secretariat to oversee a dispute settlement process when there are violations of labour rights.

The NDP also agrees with the CLC that the Government of Canada must look at due diligence for Canadian companies and funding agencies and create a framework for transnational bargaining to allow unions to represent workers in multiple countries.

Any FTA should be guided by the principle that no one should be disadvantaged. Working people cannot continue to be an afterthought in trade agreements.

Too often people talk about free trade and state that “a rising tide lifts all boats” and that simply trading with another country, they will emulate higher respect for workers, women and human rights. However, we know that is simply not the case.

When we talk about human rights there are concerns with this FTA due to the fact that there are no human rights provisions and protections and recognition of the rights of Palestinians living in occupied territories. Human rights must be a part of our relationship with Israel, rights that Canadians expect us to uphold throughout the globe. Bill C-85 does not ensure that CIFTA complies with international law. The government must respect Canada's commitment to a peaceful and just settlement of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.

Last week I travelled with the Minister of Foreign Affairs and on the trip to Israel and to Palestine, she repeatedly talked about the importance of Canada's commitment to a two-state solution. This trade agreement is an opportunity to address this issue in a meaningful way by including language that mirrors the Israel-EU agreement.

The agreement appears to cover products made in Israeli settlements and occupied territories. Neither Canada nor the United Nations recognize these settlements as part of Israel. These settlements are illegal and clearly violate the fourth Geneva Convention, which prohibits the settlement of territories acquired by war and the movement of indigenous people in those territories, among other things.

There is virtual global unanimity that the territories seized and occupied since 1967 by Israel, the West Bank, Golan Heights, Gaza and East Jerusalem are not part of Israel but form the basis of a sovereign Palestinian state. Those territories are a fraction of the land awarded to the Palestinian people by the United Nations partition of 1967.

As I said, New Democrats have worked for decades for a peaceful resolution in Israel and Palestine and we will continue to fight for fairness and justice for all, including within this agreement.

As I said at the beginning of my speech, there is much within this modernized agreement that is positive and that we agree with. We will work at committee to ensure respect of human rights is included in the newly updated CIFTA.

Trading with Canada is a privilege not just because of our incredible resources and products, but because of our global reputation. Fair trade can be a tool, among many others, that we use to positively contribute to the world around us. Together with our global partners, we can build a better future.

Canada-Israel Free Trade Agreement Implementation Act November 7th, 2018

Madam Speaker, the new CIFTA includes a commitment to encourage the use of voluntary corporate social responsibility standards. I want to ask the member why this is voluntary in CIFTA.

International Trade November 7th, 2018

Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister does not even seem to care about signing away Canadian jobs by signing onto the USMCA. The government has failed to ensure that aluminum and steel tariffs are lifted, risking the loss of at least 6,000 jobs, the jobs of people who are here on Parliament Hill today.

Aluminum workers from Kitimat to Saguenay are desperately trying to defend their jobs, families and communities. Why will the Liberals not listen to the workers' call and tell the U.S. administration that Canada will not ratify the USMCA until Trump drops his illegal tariffs?

Poverty November 7th, 2018

Mr. Speaker, the effects of poverty and social exclusion on women continue to impact Canada's economic and social development and progress. In my region of Windsor Essex, 18.3% of people live in poverty.

Among these devastating statistics, poverty is even worse for women and children. In my riding, 24% of children and 42% of female-led lone parent families live in poverty. This is three times higher than the general population, as a single mother is almost four times as likely as a two-parent family to live in poverty.

Why do women in Canada suffer, considering we are the eighth wealthiest country in the world? Women spend more time doing unpaid work, and are more likely to sacrifice career opportunities and hold part-time or temporary lower-paying jobs, often with no benefits or security, because of their family commitments and a lack of affordable child care.

Working women in Canada earn only 87¢ for every dollar earned by men. New Democrats will always fight for Canada without poverty when no one is left behind and where every Canadian can live in dignity and respect, including all women.

Business of Supply November 5th, 2018

Mr. Speaker, as I said during my speech, Windsor, which is the office that serves my riding of Essex, was closed for years under the Conservative government. We welcome the fact it has now been reopened.

However, we still have a long way to go. There is still this major backlog. There are people across our country who are being denied services.

I had someone from my riding write to me recently. They were talking about Donald Osborne, who is 95 and lives in Atlantic Canada. There was a news story on CTV about him. He is a World War II veteran who had been denied care by Veterans Affairs. My constituent wrote to me to say that regardless of policy, facts and rules, a World War II veteran had been denied services, the very services he fought for. He has fought for our freedoms, way of life and our heritage. He has seen and fought evil himself, and the constituent said he did not understand what was happening to our beloved country.

Until emails like this stop and we do not hear these stories of veterans being denied service, we have work to do in the House. I was very pleased to see this motion and I thank the member for Courtenay—Alberni for bringing this important issue forward. I do hope this principle will be applied across many different portfolios and departments. This issue of lapsed spending should not continue, because it is really confusing for Canadians. As we found out in this particular case with Veterans Affairs, a lot of money is being left on the table that Canadians are looking to have spent in their communities.