House of Commons photo

Crucial Fact

  • His favourite word was farmers.

Last in Parliament September 2021, as Liberal MP for Malpeque (P.E.I.)

Won his last election, in 2019, with 41% of the vote.

Statements in the House

Prebudget Consultations February 7th, 2008

Mr. Speaker, I will admit that I enjoyed the member's remarks because he was basically trying to point out how governments should be responsible, how members in the House should be responsible when they are using taxpayers' money for programs, and what they must do to review expenditures. I believe he said not to waste money in any shape or form.

I would take from that, that the member for Saskatoon—Humboldt would also, in a more indirect sense, believe that the government when it is passing legislation, that it should do so based on sound discussions and economic analysis. That is where the government has failed terribly.

I will quote from the Federal Court from July 16 of last year, in the court case over the government's illegal activities in terms of trying to put in place regulations. The director general of marketing policy for Agriculture Canada testified under oath at the Federal Court.

Question:

Did the government or the civil service or anybody retained by either do any analysis of how the amending regulations would function in the marketplace - are you aware of any studies of the kind I have mentioned to you?

Answer: “No”.

Question:

Was anybody retained to analyze that in the recent past?

Answer: “No”. Basically the bottom line was that no, no one was aware of anybody in the government who had done that kind of analysis.

Does the member really think the government is being responsible when it does not--

Prebudget Consultations February 7th, 2008

Mr. Speaker, the member for Winnipeg South Centre made a lot of good points, but I know she did not have time in her remarks to make them all.

My question for her relates to the Canadian Wheat Board, which I know is centred in her city. The Wheat Board and others have done an analysis that the moves by the government will take about $800 million net out of the collective economy of farmers. It was admitted by an official of the Department of Agriculture, before the federal court on an appeal, that the Government of Canada, in terms of its Wheat Board change, had not done any economic analysis, either pro or con, on its moves.

Does the member really believe it is a responsible government when it does not do any economic analysis and, in the whole process, puts at risk jobs in her city and certainly goes against the democratic desires of farmers in the west?

Prebudget Consultations February 7th, 2008

Mr. Speaker, I cannot believe what I heard, which is a lot of propaganda coming out of the PMO.

However, one thing the member for South Shore—St. Margaret's did talk about was trying to do what is needed while still living within their means.The problem with that line is that the current Conservative government has basically killed the ability of the federal government to have the means to do what is needed for this country.

Why do the Conservatives not just admit it? They have taken a country that was the envy of the G-8 in terms of the industrialized world and in terms of fiscal capacity and responsibility and driven it to the brink of deficit.

The member, in representing his riding, should be standing on the floor demanding some help for the fishermen, the farmers and the hog and beef producers who have basically said, before the agriculture committee the other day, that what the government was doing was seen by their members as a cruel joke to the families that it was supposed to help.

Why does the member ignore the facts? Why does he make a speech here saying that the government lowered income tax to 15% when in fact just the year before it raised it to 15.5%? Let us lay out some facts.

Petitions February 4th, 2008

Mr. Speaker, I am presenting a petition which is in the proper order about the serious reduction in services to rural Canada and rural Prince Edward Island by Canada Post.

The petition basically says that Canada Post is switching from resident door to door mail delivery to community mailbox delivery without properly assessing the safety of these community mailboxes to the residents. Many of the community mailboxes being established in the province of Prince Edward Island are no safer than regular mailboxes and there are additional problems in terms of accessibility, litter, snow build-up and the environment.

The petitioners call upon Parliament to ensure proper consultations by Canada Post with those people so affected.

Canadian Wheat Board February 4th, 2008

Mr. Speaker, on Friday's firing at the Canadian Wheat Board, the Prime Minister's hands are all over it. The firing of the board's vice-president of farmer relations without cause is another example of the government's reign of terror against the board.

In 2006, the government fired the CEO, fired board members and undermined elected board members. Now the government pressures the board to fire staff. Why does the Prime Minister subvert democracy, undermine freedom of speech and cause to be fired anybody who stands up to his undemocratic tactics?

Income Tax Act February 1st, 2008

Mr. Speaker, there is no question that parliamentarians have to take charge. The contents of the bill are similar to the contents in previous bills. It has been stymied by none other than the Department of Finance. That is the reality. We have to take charge and get it done. That is easy enough to do if members of all parties support the bill and move it forward. The job will then be done.

Things are not happening now with the current government in place because everything is run out of the PMO. Remember when the Prime Minister said that he would be transparent and allow free votes? This bill is a prime example. Members of the party over there supported the bill in the past, but their deputy House leader came forward with a technicality to try to stop the bill in its tracks. That is coming out of the—

Income Tax Act February 1st, 2008

Mr. Speaker, the member asked a very good question. However, I find it hard to believe the parliamentary secretary has his head stuck in the past.

One of the problems we have with that bill, and why Bill C-219 is necessary, is the people who are not paid do not get the deductions. Only the people who are paid with honorariums get it. The bill the member opposite talked about would have improved the situation for those who already received an honorarium, but it would have done nothing for those who did not.

Bill C-219 is important because it would give the same benefits to those volunteers who do not receive an honorarium. We need to give the same benefits to those firefighters and emergency workers who do not receive the benefit now.

Income Tax Act February 1st, 2008

The member asks would I support the budget? It would be the same thing as previously in the Canada grain commission bill.

The problem with the government is that it sprinkles a little bit of good stuff to leave the impression it is doing something good, but along with that puts a whole lot of other legislation and damages that which undermines the support of Canadians. That is why it makes it impossible many times for the opposition to support what it does. If Conservatives would work cooperatively instead of dictatorially, run clearly out of the Prime Minister's Office, it would make our job easier on this side of the House.

The bottom line is that Bill C-219 is an important bill for voluntary service workers. It is important to their families. It is important to them financially. It is important that this Parliament of Canada recognizes those people for what they do.

I would encourage all members, including cabinet ministers opposite, to support the bill fully, so we can do what we ought to do for voluntary emergency service workers.

Income Tax Act February 1st, 2008

moved that Bill C-219, An Act to amend the Income Tax Act (deduction for volunteer emergency service), be read the second time and referred to a committee.

Mr. Speaker, I almost feel sorry for my colleagues opposite to have to listen to me. Everything happens at once I guess. Maybe it is that good things happen all at once, I do not know.

I certainly move that Bill C-219, seconded by my colleague, the member for Cape Breton—Canso be read the second time.

This private member's Bill C-219 is really about fairness. I am shocked at the approach that the Government of Canada took yesterday in trying to deny the opportunity for the bill to be debated.

However, in your ruling, Mr. Speaker, you agreed that the bill was proper and should be debated. Even though the government attempted in a backdoor way to deny volunteer firefighters and others a tax deduction, the Speaker ruled, I believe wisely, and hopefully this bill will pass and meet the needs of those volunteer firefighters and others.

The bill is about ensuring that those who serve their communities by placing themselves at risk, by sacrificing time from their families and from their businesses, will have that time honoured and given recognition.

Most significantly, Bill C-219 is about acknowledging one of the fundamental principles behind the success of our rural communities and indeed urban ones as well. It is volunteerism.

I am referring to those who are volunteer firefighters, volunteer ambulance attendants, those who volunteer for search and rescue operations, and all of whom are required to attend training sessions and actively participate in preparation for those activities.

The principle contained in the bill has been presented in previous private members' bills in the past. In 2005 the member for Cape Breton—Canso presented Bill C-273. In 2002 the member for Lethbridge presented Bill C-325.

It is fair to say that members of all parties in past debates have basically been supportive of this approach. I was pleased to support both of those bills and wish to extend thanks on behalf of the volunteer emergency workers. This legislation will assist those members by providing recognition to those volunteers for their efforts.

It is important to note that each of these bills received the support of the House and most recently, Bill C-273 received the support of the Standing Committee on Finance.

The reason this legislation has not been passed already is not I believe been because of any particular partisan political issue. What should be acknowledged is that members of Parliament from all political parties have agreed with this legislation. That was shown with the last bill.

The problem is this. The problem has been the bureaucrats at the Department of Finance. They seem to be finding any way to stymie this bill in its tracks.

We are the politicians. We are the people who should be making the decisions. That is why I was so shocked that the deputy House leader for the governing party tried to stop the bill again because there are many people in that party who support this approach to assisting firefighters and others who do good volunteer work.

The officials of the department have been able to provide numerous reasons why they cannot comply with the legislation. What we need in this town is common sense. We do not need 16 reasons why it cannot be done. We need one reason why it can be done and that is what we want the Department of Finance to do. It is to find that one reason and make it work.

Yes, there were questions in the finance committee the last time around. There are ways of addressing them and they need to be done, so that we can assist the volunteers in rural communities.

In terms of the specifics, Bill C-219 proposes the following: that the Income Tax Act be amended to allow voluntary emergency workers to deduct from their taxable income the amount of $1,000 if they performed at least 100 hours of voluntary service and $2,000 if they performed at least 200 hours of voluntary service. That needs to be done.

Many of us rub shoulders. In fact, some people in the House have been volunteer firefighters. It is not like being a volunteer at a club. I myself, a little over 24 years ago to be exact, had a major fire and there were four fire departments in the yard. It was a day in May. Many of those firemen were farmers, too, or businessmen. As soon as the buzzer went off on their belts, they were there. It did not matter whether they were baling hay or it was threatening to rain. They left and tended to the fire.

Those people ought to be recognized. They put their businesses in jeopardy. They leave their families. They leave their businesses, they leave their families, and they leave their farms to work for the benefit of others in the community.

Liberals had this problem as well when they were on the government side fighting for the contents of this bill. There already is a payment to firefighters along the lines of this bill, though not quite as high. It is called voluntary firefighters, but only voluntary firefighters receive an honorarium.

In my community volunteers do not receive an honorarium. They take the money out of their own back pockets for their training, to buy equipment, and to assist in fundraising. We absolutely have to recognize the volunteers and what they do.

The Library of Parliament, in a paper examining Bill C-219, stated:

The current Income Tax Act contains a provision exempting from taxation the first $1,000 received by an emergency worker for volunteer services performed as an ambulance technician, firefighter or a person who assists in search or rescue of individuals or in other emergency situations. Payment must be received from a government, municipality or a public authority. The emergency worker must not be regularly employed, or paid as an employee, for their services as an emergency worker by the government, municipality or the public authority. This exemption was enacted in 2001.

The premise behind this legislation is to ensure that those who do not receive an honorarium from a government, municipality or other public authority, and yet provide the same type of service, are also given a form of compensation for that participation. That is what the bottom line is.

We need to support those voluntary emergency services out there. The point of this legislation is to have the sections, which officials acknowledge are not there, implemented and become effective for what we could call volunteer volunteers.

The finance committee, in its examination, raised a number of questions. I do not have time to go through them, but all of the questions were technical. Some of them related to record keeping. That is easily done. We do not want to impose a paper burden on anybody in terms of the administration of this bill. That is not what we are asking for. Those records are kept by fire chiefs, in any event.

For heaven's sake, can the Minister of Finance or the deputy minister of finance or whoever is in charge of the bureaucracy at the Department of Finance not trust a fire chief who is willing to put his or her life on the line, to assist in the community? I would think so. Those answers can be found and they need to be dealt with so the bill can be implemented.

I would submit that one of the key roles of the Department of Finance, given the fact as has been demonstrated by research undertaken by the Library of Parliament, has already presented the fact that the Income Tax Act currently accepts the first $1,000 voluntary emergency workers receive from taxation. It should apply the same definition to the provisions of Bill C-219, that voluntary emergency workers, not paid emergency workers who do not receive an honorarium, receive the improved income tax deductions outlined in the bill.

To conclude, for all the reasons outlined, volunteer emergency workers are people in our rural and urban communities not paid for what they do. They put themselves at risk. They take training which costs money. They have to drive back and forth to fire halls and other places for that training and for weekly meetings, taking money out of their own pockets. They have to exercise and stay in shape with the costs of doing that and buying equipment. They have to go to emergencies on the call of the buzzer. It does not matter what they are doing, whether they are in the middle of a hay field, or attending to business, or selling a widget to a client.

Firefighters and other emergency workers need to be treated fairly. They need to be recognized for their efforts. Bill C-219 will give them that recognition and assist them a little bit financially. Certainly, their families would recognize and be more supportive of their activities if Bill C-219 would be passed and carried.

The best way to deal with this would be for the Minister of Finance to just put it in the budget and be done with it because many members support it in this House.

Canada Grain Act February 1st, 2008

Mr. Speaker, I thank the member for Macleod for the concern he raised for Islanders who are still feeling the impact of a serious ice storm.

The member asked a number of questions and some of them I in fact agree are concerns. However, the dilemma that the government has put us in as an official opposition is that it mixes a little bit of good in a bill with a whole lot of the bad and, therefore, it makes it very difficult for us to support the bill without very substantive changes.

On KVD, we agree--