The House is on summer break, scheduled to return Sept. 15
House of Commons photo

Crucial Fact

  • His favourite word was farmers.

Last in Parliament April 2025, as NDP MP for Cowichan—Malahat—Langford (B.C.)

Lost his last election, in 2025, with 33% of the vote.

Statements in the House

The Budget April 14th, 2016

Mr. Speaker, the member will find no argument from this particular section of the House on the need for infrastructure funding. As I alluded to in my remarks, we have been wandering through the desert for quite some time. I will agree that the Liberal budget does include some much-needed funding for infrastructure, but it is the other parts that I really wanted to hammer home.

During the election campaign, the Liberals made some specific promises. It adds to the disappointment in politics when someone says one thing and ends up doing another. Canadians were really looking for some progressive change. When we start reading the fine print, we can see that the amount is a little less and it is back loaded. The actual amount promised is not going to happen until the 2019-20 fiscal year. That is going to be after the 2019 election.

Infrastructure is welcome to see. I will certainly be writing letters to respective ministers to see that my riding gets its fair share, as all MPs in the House will be doing.

The Budget April 14th, 2016

Mr. Speaker, before I begin, I want to let the House know that I will be splitting my time with the hon. member for Abitibi—Baie-James—Nunavik—Eeyou.

We have all been waiting for this budget for some time now, and I am honoured to stand in the House today to speak to it. Listening to ministers speak about this budget, Canadians have to sit through endless and effusive hyperbole that is liberally filled with both bombast and pomposity. Liberals are indeed masters of self-congratulation.

Unfortunately, the composition of the budgetary document breaks the covenant made during the election campaign with the Canadian people, as the Liberals do time and again when they say one thing and do the other. Like the progressive paint jobs the Liberals have applied to themselves in order to mask what the party really stands for, this budget's cover features a picture that cannot do anything but evoke an emotive response from those who gaze upon it: a mother and daughter holding hands as they walk on a yellow brick road toward the shining sun and a construction crane. It is beautifully crafted symbolism of good days ahead and the building of a new society. We can see that the Liberals are really hoping Canadians will judge this book by its cover.

Progressives have been walking through the desert for 10 years, waiting for a drop of change. It is little wonder, then, that the first glass of water offered to them seems to be so good. New Democrats are here to tear this cheerful mask off the Liberal budget and show Canadians what we are really dealing with.

There are families that I speak to all the time who are struggling with extremely expensive child care costs that often keep women at home and out of the workforce. This is one of the most important social policies of our time, and it is not being addressed. The Liberals need to know that child care cannot be provided with a small financial transfer to individual families.

Actually, Liberals do know. In a 2006 interview with the National Post, the Liberal Minister of Foreign Affairs, then the member for Saint Laurent—Cartierville, said:

We need child-care facilities to provide Canadian parents with real choice. It's a matter of social justice, but also of sound economics: child-care facilities are a good way to encourage flexibility and mobility of our workforce, at a time when, often, two parents are working outside the home.

As New Democrats, we could not agree more. We need a well-funded public policy on child care similar to what so many countries have done. The NDP will continue to propose its plan for $15-a-day child care, with spaces for those who need it.

We have spoken in the House a number of times about the social determinants of health, and one of these very strong social determinants is the right to food security. Food security is, by its very nature, linked to agriculture, which plays a key role in my riding of Cowichan—Malahat—Langford, as it does in many communities across Canada, yet this budget devotes a scant two pages to merely discussing the topic. There are no measures for organic or small-scale farmers. There is nothing to support value-added production, something that is critical for the industry. This is not the way to build the agricultural base that small communities need.

Canada needs a healthy society, and I want to take a moment to point out how the budget lacks the infrastructure needed for actually creating one.

A healthy society takes care of its seniors. People should never have to buy poor-quality food or skimp on prescription drugs just to be able to pay their rent. It is alarming that this so-called "progressive" Liberal government has totally abandoned its commitment to build long-term care facilities for seniors and increase the GST credit for new rental home construction.

The Conservatives unilaterally cut health transfers, and the Liberals have not given any indication that they will reverse these cuts. We must build a health care accord now, but there is no money set aside in this budget to do so.

I think we were all encouraged when we heard the Liberal promise of $3 billion over four years for home care. Home care is desperately needed, given Canada's aging population. We must act now on this issue, and it was good to see that both parties were on side, so it is a large disappointment to see that this promise is nowhere to be found in the budget now in front of Parliament.

The budget is also missing funding for mental health, long-term care for seniors, and palliative care. The lack of palliative care is clearly disappointing, especially given that, during the 41st Parliament, we passed a motion saying that we would work on high-quality home-based and hospice palliative care. The motion was not reflected in the budget document, and it is a glaring omission in light of the physician-assisted dying legislation we will soon be debating.

When we speak about a sustainable society, we need to address climate change, the great challenge of our time, together. New Democrats welcome the low-carbon economy fund, but we would obviously like to see it get started sooner than 2017 and actually include details on what it means or how it works. We are still subsidizing the fossil fuel industry for the foreseeable future. The Liberals promised to repeal this Conservative subsidy in their election platform, but we still do not see it. New Democrats will continue to push the government on its promises and to propose new solutions to our pressing problems.

When we talk of green infrastructure to help us transition to a sustainable economy, we remain concerned that the level of funding is inadequate for small and remote communities to receive access to these funds. I know I speak for many communities, when there is so much to be updated and restored.

In my riding of Cowichan—Malahat—Langford, the effects of climate change are being felt, both last year and in the foreseeable years. The Cowichan River is reaching dangerously low levels, and we really need to update the weir to hold back more supply. That is one thing on which I will be pressing the government. We need to have this kind of funding for our infrastructure, to make it more resilient, because climate change is happening.

Why are the Liberal members of Parliament from British Columbia not standing up for B.C. ferries? I see $51 million in the budget for the Atlantic ferries, but nothing for the B.C. ferries. Why are they not standing up for our coast? BC Ferries is arguably the largest ferry transportation system in the world, and there is zero mention from the Liberals. I hope Liberal MPs from B.C. have a great time talking to their constituents about that glaring omission.

On indigenous rights, the government has not kept its promises to first nations in the budget. Education funding in the budget is $800 million short of the government's election promises. Even then, the funding is so back loaded; it does not come into effect right now to address the underfunding crisis.

Cindy Blackstock, who spoke to our convention this weekend, has stated that the government is $130 million short on meeting its legal commitment, set out by the Canadian Human Rights Tribunal ruling that the child welfare program discriminates against indigenous children.

These promises have come up short, but even then, we must do more right away as a turning point for our indigenous communities as they are living from crisis to crisis. It is totally unacceptable in our country. This point was emphasized time and again by all parties during our emergency debate on Tuesday evening, and I hope we follow through. I hope the debate was not just a one-off and that some meaningful action comes through in this noble House.

In this period of sunny ways and sunny days, the Liberal light can be quite blinding after years of Conservative darkness. It will take time for Canadians' eyes to adjust to the fact that the budget would not deliver on Liberal electoral promises.

Canadians want progressive change, and we will be in the House fighting to make that change a reality. We will stand up against the tempting promises of the Liberals that were never intended to be fulfilled. As New Democrats, we remain united in a vision for a better Canada that is built on common goals of solidarity, equality, fairness, and prosperity for all.

Situation in Indigenous Communities April 12th, 2016

Mr. Speaker, earlier my colleague from Timmins—James Bay told the House that the greatest resource in Canada is not oil. It is not our metals, our forestry, our fish, or our agriculture. It is our children, and our children's greatest resource is hope. It is that wholehearted optimism about positive outcomes, that special way that children seem to approach each day as they wake up. I have seen it in my own twin daughters every day, and it is a remarkable thing to behold.

Children are the future of every community across this vast land we call Canada, and that is why it is so devastating when children lose that hope.

In 2012, Cowichan Tribes Chief Harvey Alphonse, in response to 52 suicide alerts in his community, said, “My personal experience is that a couple of individuals that have approached me have considered taking their life.... They've given up because they feel there isn't any hope for them.”

The gap still exists in first nations children funding despite the promises in the budget, so I ask the hon. member if he will stand and say that his government is going to commit to developing that greatest of all resources, the hope of our children, so that all children will have that full opportunity.

World Water Day March 22nd, 2016

Mr. Speaker, New Democrats strongly believe that access to clean water is a human right. In 2010, the United Nations General Assembly recognized that clean drinking water and sanitation are essential to the realization of human rights.

Today is an opportunity to recognize and learn more about water-related issues, to be inspired to tell others, and to take action to make a difference.

This has been happening in my riding, where the people of Shawnigan Lake have been fighting a noble battle to protect their watershed from contamination.

Furthermore, 73% of first nations communities in Canada are living with water systems that are medium to high risk, which is an absolute national shame for a country that boasts 20% of the world's fresh water.

On this World Water Day, I call on the government to enact meaningful environmental protections so that every person in Canada has access to clean water.

Questions on the Order Paper March 11th, 2016

With respect to the RCMP for the year 2015, broken down by province and territory: (a) how many investigations led to charges under the Criminal Code for animal cruelty; (b) how many charges of animal cruelty led to convictions; (c) how many convictions of animal cruelty led to fines; and (d) how many convictions of animal cruelty led to jail time?

Citizenship Act March 10th, 2016

Mr. Speaker, I would like to express my thanks to my colleague for his well-received speech in this House.

I took some time to go through the Criminal Code of Canada, specifically section 83. It is a very lengthy part of the Criminal Code. For those who are not aware, that is the section that deals with terrorism. It defines every aspect of terrorism: participating in it, supporting it, and financing it. However, that is not the point I want to get to. The point is that terrorism is defined under the Criminal Code. It is a crime, and I want to instruct my Conservative friends in the House that it is a crime.

Now, if I, as a natural-born Canadian, or any of my natural-born Canadian friends, were to engage in terrorist activities, we would go to jail. I have heard suggestions in this House that the bill would somehow let terrorists off the hook. The punishment for terrorism is usually 25 years to life. It is not an easy sentence.

When we look at the bill, we have to remember that terrorism is a crime and should be treated as such. I would like my friend from Burnaby to extrapolate on that point and maybe give some instruction to our Conservative colleagues in this House.

Citizenship Act March 10th, 2016

Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank my colleague, the member for Newmarket—Aurora, for his fine speech, and I would like to congratulate the Liberal government for bringing forward this bill. There are a lot of provisions that we, in the NDP, can support.

However, there is one thing I would draw to my colleague's attention. I want to reference the Charter of Rights and Freedoms because I think that is a very important document when we deliberate in this chamber, specifically section 11, under legal rights, which states that anyone charged with an offence has a right to a trial before a court that is unbiased and independent of political or any other influence.

I realize that an offence is different from revocation of citizenship, but I think in this chamber we have to look at all of our laws with the spirit of the charter in mind.

Bill C-24 eliminated the right to a judicial hearing for people who are about to have their citizenship revoked. Civil liberty groups, including the Canadian Bar Association, were against this. I would ask my colleague if he agrees with organizations like the Canadian Bar Association that people who are about to lose their citizenship should always have the right to a fair hearing before an independent and impartial decision-maker, keeping in line with the spirit of the charter, specifically section 11.

Navigation Protection Act March 10th, 2016

moved for leave to introduce Bill C-252, An Act to amend the Navigation Protection Act (Shawnigan Lake).

Mr. Speaker, it gives me great pleasure to rise in the House to introduce this bill today. This bill adds Shawnigan Lake to the scheduled list of waters protected under the Navigation Protection Act.

It is but a first small step in the much larger battle against contamination of our water resources. It is outrageous that we are not effectively protecting marine wildlife, drinking water, and our watersheds from environmental degradation.

I want to let the community of Shawnigan know that I will continue to be an ally in the fight to protect water resources and preserve them for generations to come.

If I may, I would like to take this opportunity to recognize the Shawnigan community's courageous fight against the contaminated soil dump in their watershed. I intend to be there with them for the long term.

(Motions deemed adopted, bill read the first time and printed)

Canada Labour Code February 26th, 2016

Mr. Speaker, we have certainly heard a lot of questions from the Conservative side about Bill C-525 and how we are not supporting secret ballots and all that, but what I do not hear from that side of House is discussion of Bill C-377. In my mind that was the more onerous piece of legislation. The way it tied up unions in knots, it really did seek to kneecap them and their ability to organize workers.

I would like to hear my hon. colleague's comments on that particular piece of legislation and how it was a direct attack on the labour movement.

Canada Labour Code February 26th, 2016

Mr. Speaker, I listened to the response to the parliamentary secretary's question, but I did not hear an answer. Therefore, I will pose it again. Why did the previous bill not include chambers of commerce, religious organizations, and professional associations? Why did it only single out unions? It is a very simple question. I would like to hear a response.