House of Commons photo

Track Wayne

Your Say


Crucial Fact

  • His favourite word is report.

Liberal MP for Malpeque (P.E.I.)

Won his last election, in 2015, with 62% of the vote.

Statements in the House

Statistics Act June 20th, 2017

Mr. Speaker, I listened to the remarks of the member for Sherwood Park—Fort Saskatchewan. The lack of real understanding of what happened in the appointments process was almost dizzying. I really cannot imagine anybody from the Conservative Party of Canada talking about appointments and credibility in the same sentence. It is amazing.

Being from Nova Scotia, Mr. Speaker, you would understand that if we were to do some research with respect to Peter MacKay's wedding party, we would find not one person in that wedding party who had not been appointed to a position by the previous government. They were all Conservatives and all lacked credibility in those positions.

Does the member not think that the process set up by the current Prime Minister was to make it open and transparent and to ensure there was credibility and understanding with respect to the issues with which the Liberals would deal in regard to the Prime Minister's appointments? This is all about making good appointments. That party over there has absolutely no credibility when it comes to talking about appointments and credibility in the same sentence. Would he not agree?

Committees of the House June 20th, 2017

Mr. Speaker, I have the honour to present, in both official languages, the 18th report of the Standing Committee on Finance, entitled “Canada's Federal Regional Development Agencies Supporting Businesses, Sectors, Individuals and Communities: A Summary of the Testimony”.

I want to add that this will be the last report for the two analysts, Dylan Gowans and Florian Richard, because they are leaving the Library of Parliament to go back to university. I want to thank them for their tremendous efforts over the last year, and their chief, June Dewetering, for working so hard with them as well.

This is a report without recommendations. It is a summary of what the regional development agencies had to say.

Questions on the Order Paper June 16th, 2017

With regard to the investigation into the Clyde River Fish Kill in Clyde River and area on Prince Edward Island (PEI): (a) how many personnel from the Department of Fisheries and Oceans (DFO) have been involved in the investigation; (b) with regard to interviews conducted between DFO officials and individuals involved in the case, how many interviews have taken place, and over what period of time; (c) with regard to trips to PEI related to this investigation made by off-island DFO offices, (i) how many trips were made, (ii) how many vehicle hours have been accumulated, (iii) what was the duration of each trip, (iv) what were the accommodation and travel status costs; (d) who requested this extended investigation at the federal level; (e) which individual, or individuals, from PEI requested the assistance of the DFO; (f) has the DFO been provided with a report from Environment Canada on the extraordinary rain event that caused the flooding, and if so, what did the report conclude; and (g) what are the details of all correspondence, both written and electronic, related to this matter, between officials from the PEI Department of the Environment and DFO personnel?

Main Estimates, 2017-18 June 14th, 2017

Mr. Speaker, I want to follow-up on the comments made by the Treasury Board minister.

First, the member opposite accused this government of talking the talk, but not walking the walk. If there was any experience in that kind of talking the talk and not walking the walk, it was the previous government with cuts to the RCMP, services, EI, the public service, and to pretty near everything known to man.

Let us talk about the progress this government is making. Here is a quote from today's Globe and Mail, “The Bank of Canada sent out more signals Tuesday that it's moving closer to an interest-rate hike as the economy continues to strengthen.” A quote from the Governor of the Bank of Canada, “The economy is gathering momentum, and not just in certain spots but across a much- wider array.”

That is because of things this government is doing, and because of things the Treasury Board minister talked about. This government is talking the talk and walking the walk, and we are investing in Canadian—

Main Estimates, 2017-18 June 14th, 2017

Mr. Speaker, I listened to the member for Perth—Wellington. For the record, it is great to make speeches in this place, but for heaven's sake, let them have at least some semblance of reality.

The member talked about this government going into deficit, and I admit we are. Any business that is going to do anything and remain in business has to invest in the future and innovation. It has to make that investment so it is efficient and productive in the future.

I want to come back to what the member said about the debt. Let us look at some reality.

In 1984, after the Pierre Elliott Trudeau years, the debt of our country was $135 billion. In 1994, after the Mulroney years, a Conservative government, the debt was $478 billion. Conservatives have very seldom ever balanced the books. Liberals always have dealt with the tough decisions to balance the books. It went up a little bit, after the Chrétien-Martin years, but there were eight surpluses and they paid down some of the debt over those years. Then of course there was the Harper government. It added another $170 billion to the debt.

The Conservatives should look at the reality, look at the figures. It is the Conservative Party that has always driven our country into debt. Why we are moving with some deficit—

Main Estimates, 2017-18 June 14th, 2017

Madam Speaker, I do enjoy some time on the finance committee with the member for Edmonton Manning. He mentioned fiction. There really was a lot of fiction in that speech.

I will give the member a little history about debt in our country.

During the Mulroney years, the debt went up, and that was a Conservative government. Then the Chrétien and Martin years was when the government had to make hard decisions. I come from a region where those hard decisions really hurt. The government made those decisions, balanced the books, and had a surplus for eight or nine budgets.

Then Mr. Harper came along and drove us into $170 billion dollars worth of additional debt in the country. It was not just the debt that was the problem; it was the services he cut. He cut back on the military. He had the lowest spending on the military of any prime minister in 50 years. While he talked a different line, he cut the investments into science and research.

The budget from the Liberal Minister of Finance makes investments. The target for balancing the books is not there yet, but we will not create fiction. We will take our time and do it right. We have invested in infrastructure and research and science. Why can the member not see that this investment is there for the future, for our children and grandchildren?

Cannabis Act June 6th, 2017

Madam Speaker, I believe the member for Halifax left out one very important point about what legalization would do, and that is that individuals would know the strength of the product and that there would not be impurities in that product.

People do not know what they are buying off the streets from the criminal element, and that is a health factor in itself. I wonder if the member for Halifax could comment on that.

Paris Agreement June 6th, 2017

Mr. Speaker, earlier the minister said the motion was important to see where the new Conservative leadership stands. I would tell her that I would not hold too much hope. This is the party that cancelled Kyoto, and I think she will find it is the same old Conservative Party that has put us in the position, because of the cancellation of Kyoto, that we missed opportunities.

I live on an island. I will tell members climate change is very important to us. How does the minister see putting the economy and the environment together and dealing with both, in enhancing our opportunities as Canadians?

Cannabis Act June 2nd, 2017

Mr. Speaker, I congratulate the member on his remarks. I thought they were very thorough, well thought out, and very fair. I am pleased to hear that his party will be supporting Bill C-45 going to committee and I hope there is a robust debate there.

I have a couple of questions.

Having been in a previous government that proposed the decriminalization of cannabis back in about 2002, I do see the approach and I understand where the party and the member are coming from in that regard, because it does not make sense to have all these people with records who face the cost of a pardon and the loss of economic opportunity for having been charged for small amounts of marijuana. The problem with the decriminalization approach—and I agree on the member's point on going forward with a progressive approach—is that decriminalization, in and of itself, does not take the criminal element out of the sale of the product on the market. Does the member not see that as a problem in responding only with decriminalization?

Second, on the point of revenue, I think there are a lot of people who think this is going to mean gobs of money for governments. I do not believe that will be the case, because we have to keep the revenue very stable or at fairly low prices or we are going to encourage the black market to provide illegal product. I wonder what the member has to say on that as well.

Budget Implementation Act, 2017, No. 1 June 2nd, 2017

Mr. Speaker, I listened with interest to the member for Joliette as he spoke mainly about the infrastructure bank.

If I could put it simply, I would say the member sees a mountain where there is really only a molehill. The outrageous comments the member made about how this infrastructure bank would affect his province, municipalities, and other institutions in a province are just absolutely and purely wrong. It is simply wrong.

What is the infrastructure bank? This bill would establish the Canada infrastructure bank as a federal crown corporation and set out its powers, governance framework, and financial management and control. That is the same as other crown corporations that operate in this country.

As for the $35 billion and making an opportunity for so-called friends, that is purely wrong as well. What this infrastructure bank would do is bring Canada up to the 21st century by providing the opportunity for private investors to partner with public investors to build the infrastructure that our children and grandchildren will need in the future. That is what this bank would do.

This is an opportunity for Canadians to set the foundation for our infrastructure going forward into the next decades. That is what it would really do.