House of Commons photo

Crucial Fact

  • Her favourite word was post.

Last in Parliament September 2021, as Independent MP for Don Valley East (Ontario)

Won her last election, in 2019, with 60% of the vote.

Statements in the House

Committees of the House February 12th, 2007

Mr. Speaker, I listened with interest to my colleague opposite and the question that was asked of her. I wonder if she would comment on the following.

The Conservatives claim they are supporting women, but at the same time they are removing equality and advocacy from the functions of Status of Women Canada which helped support women. This is especially true when the Status of Women has worked for women who needed advocacy for the past 25 years. It has led to women really finding their place in society.

How can eliminating money from the vulnerable, money from Status of Women Canada, money from literacy programs and money from volunteer recognition help support women?

If we are talking about supporting Afghan women, I would like to put things into perspective. There are only four provinces out of the 24 provinces in Afghanistan that face problems. Who are we really trying to help? Let us help women here first.

Volunteerism February 8th, 2007

Mr. Speaker, more than 12 million Canadians provide $2 billion worth of voluntary work annually and approximately 45% of Canadians use their spare time to volunteer and serve the community.

However, in the draconian cuts announced by the so-called new government of Canada last September, the Minister of Canadian Heritage and Status of Women announced that she was eliminating federal funding to the Canada Volunteerism Initiative. This makes no sense. The Conservatives inherited a $13 billion surplus and yet they feel it necessary to eliminate this essential service.

What was the rationale for these cuts? Were they based on any form of evaluation? Did anyone bother to look at whether the goals of the program were being met before making this decision?

I understand that the minister, after four months, has still not met with Volunteer Canada to discuss these drastic cuts.

Why has the mean-spirited government targeted volunteers and why will the minister not make herself accountable to Canadians?

Foreign Affairs February 6th, 2007

Mr. Speaker, the typical answer: no accountability.

Of course there is more. The passenger manifest shows that Challenger returned home via Ireland with only one passenger. Who benefited from this expensive flight costing almost $23,000? Not the minister, not the deputy minister, just one lucky Conservative political staffer who finally hit the big time: the foreign minister's own spin doctor and director of communications, Dan Dugas.

How can the government justify the outrageous abuse of taxpayers' dollars?

Foreign Affairs February 6th, 2007

Mr. Speaker, many young bachelors like to rent a limo on prom night. However, it is less funny when the Minister of Foreign Affairs bills taxpayers $45,000 for a Challenger flight to Rome to see Condoleezza Rice.

How does the minister justify spending $45,000 on his Conservative flying limousine when there are 11 commercial flights daily which would have cost a total of $2,933 per person?

Business of Supply February 1st, 2007

Mr. Speaker, I used to sit on the environment committee so I am very interested in hearing the misrepresentations again. Here go the members of the Conservative Party on the environment committee who could not even answer and said they were going to defer on this one when asked about climate change. When one does not believe in climate change or GHGs, how can one even have credibility?

In fact, Madam Gélinas, who was the commissioner, said that if we would follow the way we were going we would meet the 2015 targets. The Liberals had made arrangements with 735 large final emitters to ensure that they had statutory reductions. We had worked on the EnerGuide program. We had done all sorts of things, but the Conservatives want to delete it from the website and go to la-la land.

Business of Supply February 1st, 2007

Mr. Speaker, for 11 years we had to clean up the Mulroney mess. The Conservatives left the country in a financial disaster. The former Liberal government had to first get that mess out of the way. This is another mess that the Conservative government will be putting this country into. It deleted the whole environment program and deleted $5.1 billion. Then the Minister of Natural Resources was proud of the fact that he put in place $2.1 billion.

The government has no credibility. The Prime Minister keeps calling Kyoto as being something of a socialist nature that is sucking funds out of the wealthy nations. Canadians do not believe the validity of the Conservative government.

Business of Supply February 1st, 2007

Mr. Speaker, I welcome the opportunity to debate one of the most important issues that Canadians face in the 21st century, global warming and climate change.

I will be splitting my time with the member for Vancouver Quadra.

The motion that stands before us reads as follows:

That, in the opinion of this House:

(a) there is overwhelming scientific evidence that the world's climate is changing as a result activity and this poses the most serious ecological threat of our time;

(b) the government must reconfirm Canada's commitment to honour the principles and targets of the Kyoto Protocol in their entirety;

(c) the government must create and publish a credible plan to reduce Canada's greenhouse gas emissions to meet Canada's Kyoto commitments;

(d) the government must establish a 'cap and trade' emission reduction system and regulations for industry; and

(e) the Canadian Environmental Protection Act is available immediately to launch the necessary action.

My colleagues in the Liberal caucus and the Liberal Party have supported the Kyoto protocol since it was first negotiated in 1997. In a nutshell, the Kyoto protocol represents an international treaty that recognizes the scientific fact that increased emissions of carbon dioxide and five other greenhouse gases are causing global warming.

Naturally occurring greenhouse gases, mostly carbon dioxide, nitrous oxide, methane and water vapour, are present in the atmosphere due to both natural processes and human activities. Greenhouse gases help to regulate our climate by trapping heat from the sun in the lower atmosphere, warmth that would otherwise escape back into space. This greenhouse gas effect keeps the average temperature on earth at approximately 15°C. However, over the past 200 years increased atmospheric concentrations of greenhouse gases have accumulated as a result of human activity, mostly from burning fossil fuels, oil, coal and natural gas.

In Canada, the growth of greenhouse gas emissions are attributed to increased coal consumption for electricity and steam generation, growth in fossil fuel production that is largely for export and increases in energy consumption arising from transportation needs.

There are some people, however, who continue to blindly deny scientific facts and prefer to bury their heads in the oil sands. One person in particular, the current Prime Minister, has yet to publicly acknowledge the science of climate change and global warming.

In fact, when the Conservatives outlined their five priorities in the last election, I can assure the House that the environment did not even make it on to the list.

This week we were reminded of that when we learned that our current Prime Minister, who once served as leader of the Canadian Alliance Party, publicly stated that:

Kyoto is essentially a socialist scheme to suck money out of wealth-producing nations.

He used this appeal as a fundraiser for his party claiming that:

The Reform Party defeated the Charlottetown Accord in an epic struggle in the fall of 1992. Now the Canadian Alliance is leading the battle against the Kyoto Accord.

It is no wonder recent polls show that Canadians have a hard time swallowing the Prime Minister's sudden conversion to environmentalism. It is much more likely that the Prime Minister is embracing political opportunism and simply fueling public cynicism.

Today, 40% of Canadians rate the Conservative government's track record on the environment as poor. Why is that? It is because one of the first acts of the Conservative government was to dismantle all the environmental initiatives launched by the previous Liberal government.

In 2005, we had a comprehensive plan set in place but the Conservatives quickly cancelled project green. They cancelled the one tonne challenge that asked ordinary Canadians to do what they could to reduce their consumption of energy. They cancelled the popular EnerGuide program that gave homeowners grants to improve their energy efficiency. They cancelled funding for scientific research aimed at sustainable development.

However, the Conservatives love to repeat the monotonous mantra that the Liberals achieved nothing on the environment file in 13 years of government.

I would like to remind the Conservatives that it was a Liberal government that joined with 168 other countries in the world to sign the Kyoto protocol in 1997. It was a Liberal government that introduced the Canadian Environmental Protection Act in 1999. It was also a Liberal government that ratified the Kyoto protocol in 2002.

Last October, the former environment minister introduced the clean air act which quickly went over like a lead balloon with Canadians. In fact, less than two months after introducing this flimsy document, the environment minister was quickly sacked by the Conservatives. The so-called clean air act is completely unnecessary because the federal government already has all the legislative authority to regulate greenhouse gas emissions.

Currently, we collects information on greenhouse gases through three departments and three key pieces of legislation: Environment Canada under the authority of the 1999 Canadian Environmental Protection Act; StatsCanada under the authority of the Statistics Act; and the Alberta environment department under the climate change and emissions act.

Canadians know that the clean air act is nothing more than a political ploy. The fact is that the Liberal government had an eight year, $10 billion plan called project green. The Conservatives, in a zealous pursuit of their ideological rhetoric, cancelled everything.They have been in office now for more than one year and Canada still does not have a plan to reduce greenhouse gases or deal with climate change.

By abandoning the Kyoto protocol, the Conservatives have severely damaged our international reputation by ignoring international law and our international commitments to 168 other countries.

We cannot afford to waste another year playing politics with the environment. Canadians will not tolerate this kind of behaviour and will remember the Conservatives dithering on the most important challenge facing the planet.

I ask that instead of declaring war on the Kyoto protocol, the Prime Minister should focus his energy on working with the international community, working with other parties in this minority Parliament and working with Canadians to leave an environment legacy that generations of future Canadians will inherit.

The Environment January 31st, 2007

Mr. Speaker, the Conservatives have still not answered the question.

The world's scientific community is about to release a report that is unanimous about the growing climate change crisis. The Kyoto protocol is the only global effort to deal with the crisis, but the Prime Minister has never believed in Kyoto. In fact, he promised he would, “Redirect federal spending aimed at fulfilling the terms of the increasingly irrelevant Kyoto Protocol”.

Was the Prime Minister misleading Canadians then, or is he misleading them now?

CRA Disability Advisory Committee December 12th, 2006

Mr. Speaker, one of the first actions taken by the so-called new government under the Conservatives was to terminate the CRA Disability Advisory Committee.

The purpose of this committee was to help the Canada Revenue Agency make meaningful improvements to the tax treatment of people living with disabilities. This all volunteer committee was created with the unanimous consent of the House of Commons, and I might add, with the support of the current Prime Minister.

Since the committee was terminated last September, the members have continued to meet on a monthly basis simply because the work is too important to be abandoned.

If the government is really serious about improving the lives of disabled Canadians, I call upon the Minister of National Revenue to immediately recognize the continuing work of the disability advisory committee.

Status of Women December 8th, 2006

Mr. Speaker, I asked a specific question about a specific program and all I received from the minister was a repeated blah, blah, blah. I say shame on the minister.

Why will she not have some spine and admit that the $5 million that she axed from the budget is a cut? She does not understand math. It is not a reinvestment.

We now hear that the National Association of Women and the Law is concerned about the future of its funding. Why will the minister not have some courage and admit that she signed off on these cuts and is trying to camouflage the facts?