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

Crucial Fact

  • His favourite word was afghanistan.

Last in Parliament August 2019, as Conservative MP for Calgary Forest Lawn (Alberta)

Won his last election, in 2015, with 48% of the vote.

Statements in the House

Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans-Pacific Partnership Implementation Act September 18th, 2018

Madam Speaker, it is a pleasure to rise and speak on the subject of trade again. In the 21 years I have been in Parliament I have spoken on numerous occasions on our country's trade agenda. It is critically important, we all know. We are a small population with large natural resources, so foreign trade is extremely important for us.

In the early days, our trade with the U.S.A. was very high. We had a great trade relationship with the U.S.A. with our integrated economies. At that time we were in the opposition and we had a Liberal government in power. The Liberals talk about their trade agenda today, but they moved very slowly. At the time of prime ministers Chrétien and Martin, they did not sign too many trade agreements. They talked a lot about it, but they did not sign any meaningful trade agreements.

Also, during that period of time the NDP was expressing some concern. Let us be very clear. The NDP has always opposed any trade agreement.

Then we recognized the fact that Canada needed to open up its markets and not rely on one market. Henceforth, our government's efforts were directed toward that, with the help of the department of foreign trade and foreign affairs. We have some very excellent public service officers who have had extreme experience in negotiating trade deals. They are non-partisan, and look after the interests of Canada. I want to make that point very clearly, because this government is trying to put their work down as if the public servants in the departments do not know what is good for Canada. The fact of the matter is, when our Conservative government came into power it realized that we needed to push this agenda very strongly. As my colleague has stated about the number of trade agreements we signed, let us not forget how many FIP agreements we signed around the world as well, because FIPA is the first step in going into international trade. The member for Abbotsford, who led the file, worked extremely hard to ensure the groundwork was laid. Let us make it very clear that the groundwork was laid by the Conservatives.

The groundwork for CETA was laid by our government. The groundwork for TPP was laid by our government. NAFTA was, again, the Conservatives under Brian Mulroney. As we go forward, the groundwork for all trade agreements was done by the Conservatives.

Sure enough, when we changed government, the Liberals now recognize that these trade agreements are important. However, as usual, trying to please everyone, they do not look at the bigger picture and were more concerned with other agendas, and less for trade. It was only after the president of the U.S.A. started saying he wanted to renegotiate NAFTA, and with so many conditions, that we now face a situation where we need new markets. Suddenly, the Liberals have woken up. We cannot forget the Prime Minister leaving the other leaders waiting in Vietnam for them to talk about TPP. All the other leaders were there.

We get an idea of what the Liberals are talking about in changing the TPP. We had been negotiating with the same governments for a long period of time. Do they think they have suddenly changed and have started accepting what the Liberal government is trying to say, and that the markets have changed in the TPP? That is nonsense. They have their position. Even though they are tinkering to make it look like it is a Liberal agenda, it was our government that laid the groundwork, and as far as it is concerned, it is delayed again.

With the Trans Mountain pipeline now dropped, getting our resources to tidewater has been delayed and the impact on the economy is very strong. Now we see no pipeline to tidewater, no oil going out, and NAFTA now under challenge.

Now, suddenly, the Liberals have woken up and are saying they need TPP. Before that, if these things had not happened, the government's lacklustre agenda on trade would have been moving very slowly. Therefore, today I will say very clearly that I am very glad to have spoken in the House for 21 years on trade promotion for Canada, and to be the last speaker on this so that we can get this thing going very quickly. We need it implemented so we can get Canadian businesses working.

Indeed, the NDP will always voice concerns about it and talk about job losses. However, the great part of the whole thing is that when the economy moves forward collectively, everybody gains. Even though there might be a slight change in a sector, they will gain over the long term. If we contract our market, then the loss of jobs is far higher than we can anticipate.

Talking about farmers, my colleague sitting next to me is a successful farmer in Alberta, and he is also looking for markets to sell his crop. Therefore, when the NDP members say that the farmers are very worried, I can say that my colleague sitting next to me who is a farmer is not worried. He is looking for the opportunity that will allow him to sell his grain on the world market. This is what Canadian businesses are looking for. Therefore, let us look at the larger picture of what is important for this country. It is important for this country to have good trade agreements, so that Canadian businesses have a level playing field with other countries.

Trade agreements make level playing fields. As we see with China, we have an unlevel playing field. China has its own rules, which are not compatible with ours, and this is why the Chinese are not very keen. Neither were we, as the Conservative government, keen on opening free trade with China, because we have different regulations and systems. However, with other countries, and now with the opening market of Japan and all of these countries, we are looking at the growing economies of the world. We should be part of this growth, so that Canadians can benefit with jobs, jobs, jobs. Therefore, we need a collective approach from the government so that we can move forward.

I have to say one thing. I want to tell you guys here to wake up and smell the—

Questions Passed as Orders for Returns September 17th, 2018

With regard to interest payments on the federal debt: (a) how much did the government pay in interest payments in the (i) 2015-16, (ii) 2016-17, (iii) 2017-18 fiscal years; and (b) how much is the government projected to pay in interest payments in each of the next ten fiscal years?

Questions Passed as Orders for Returns September 17th, 2018

With regard to appointments to federal boards, agencies, and associations since December 1, 2016, for each appointment: what are the details of each appointee, including (i) name, (ii) province, (iii) position, (iv) start and end date of term, (v) was appointment a reappointment or a new appointment?

Questions on the Order Paper September 17th, 2018

With regard to the Canada Infrastructure Bank: (a) what is the complete list of infrastructure projects financed by the bank to date; and (b) for each project in (a), what are the details including (i) amount of federal financing, (ii) location of project, (iii) scheduled completion date of project, (iv) project description?

Latin American Heritage Month Act June 13th, 2018

Mr. Speaker, I am sure that somewhere down the line, there will be a few members from that part of the world in the Liberal caucus that will feel compelled to talk. It shows quite clearly that they really need some outreach programs, but we will do it, so do not worry about it. I know it is late, so we can throw a couple of rules out the window.

It has been an honour and a pleasure for me to recognize Latin Americans who have contributed. I have had the greatest honour and pleasure of visiting all of these countries. I was one of the parliamentary secretaries who visited most of the countries in the world and I had a great time in Latin America.

I will conclude by again saying that it is a great honour and privilege to have Latin Americans in Canada.

Latin American Heritage Month Act June 13th, 2018

Mr. Speaker, my colleague said that he was the 19th speaker. I will be the 21st speaker. The 20th spot is in between and we thought the Liberals would fill it, since they have not gotten up to say a word about the bill. They have a chance, spot 20, to get up and speak and say something.

I am delighted to support Bill S-218, an act respecting the month of October as Latin American heritage month.

I want to pay tribute to the bill's sponsor, my very good friend from Ontario, the late senator Tobias Enverga Jr. Last year, Senator Enverga passed away while on a parliamentary visit to Colombia. I travelled with the senator many times to the Philippines and elsewhere, and I know that he was a great Canadian looking out for Canada's interests.

Latin America is in our hemisphere. It is part and parcel of the Americas. Therefore, it is critically important that we have strong relations. As a matter of fact, we have had a relationship with Latin America for a long time. In my own riding of Calgary Forest Lawn, the northern part is called the Latino village. It is home to thousands of Latin Americans of Chilean origin who escaped from Chile and made their home in this part of Canada. We, of course, always had a policy of giving shelter to those who are fleeing for human rights.

The Prime Minister said this on the world stage. However, the Liberals are not speaking on this bill. Therefore, I will explain that when the Conservatives were in power, we were the ones who actually felt that it was very important that we had a special relationship with Latin America. To that point, the former prime minister appointed my friend and colleague, the Hon. Diane Ablonzy, as well as the member for Thornhill, as special ministers of state in charge of Latin affairs. They were given a special responsibility to build relations between Canada and Latin America.

Part of my duty, as parliamentary secretary, was to represent Canada overseas. In fact, I travelled to many countries in Latin America, such as Uruguay, Argentina, Chile, Ecuador, Brazil, Bolivia, Guyana, and Mexico. While I was on a state visit to Brazil, we went to Trinidad and Tobago, and from there we could see Venezuela.

Venezuela is a country I will never forget, because this is where my effigy was burned. It is the only place in the world where somebody burned my effigy. Can members imagine that? The reason was that when former president Chávez died, I said that he was a dictator and a human rights abuser. Holy smokes, did they ever have a demonstration. They burned my effigy out in the water.

However, we have had great relations. We stand up through the Organization of American States with strong support for human rights, in this case for Venezuela. As members know, before the current government took steps, we had also taken strong steps to fight human rights abusers. However, in the larger scheme of things, we share this hemisphere with Latin America. Therefore, it is natural for us to ensure that we have a solid relationship.

My other colleagues gave the names of outstanding Canadians of Latin American origin who have contributed immensely to the well-being of our nation and for building our relationship. It is only natural that Conservatives put forward a bill to celebrate Latin American heritage month. There are close to half a million Latino Canadians living in our country. Therefore, it is very important that we celebrate their heritage.

When I was the president of the India Canada Association, there were cultural nights. One of the most exciting things to see were the Latino cultural dances and performances. The crowds were thrilled. Before I became a parliamentary secretary and visited many countries, I used to say that I did not have to go to Latin America because they are all here. I can watch them in my backyard or on the stage, because we in Canada are fortunate enough to share their culture. We all know their great culture. Who can forget the great parades in Brazil?

Ultimately, I am very glad that parliamentarians are speaking about recognizing their contributions. Somewhere along the line, I think one of you guys, in spot number 20, should get up and say something to recognize that these are great Canadians. A bit of input from your side would be fine. You are just sitting there—

Questions Passed as Orders for Returns June 8th, 2018

With regard to privacy breaches, since September 19, 2016, broken down by department, agency, Crown corporation, or other government entity: (a) how many privacy breaches have occurred; and (b) for each privacy breach, (i) was it reported to the Privacy Commissioner, (ii) how many individuals were affected by each breach, (iii) what were the dates of the privacy breach, (iv) were the individuals affected notified that their information may have been compromised and, if so, on what date and in what manner were they notified, (v) what was the incident summary or nature of the breach?

Business of Supply May 8th, 2018

Madam Speaker, I have already said that new technology and investment are available.

To answer his question, the funding would not be based on taxpayers. It is already mandated in the federal Nuclear Fuel Waste Act. It is already there. We are not putting anything new out there. What is wrong with reusing what is already there so that we can carry on with this new idea, for which we do have the technology? I suggest we look at the paper that has been published by Professor Peter Ottensmeyer of the University of Toronto.

Business of Supply May 8th, 2018

Madam Speaker, I will gladly answer the question. The member probably did not listen to what I was saying. I am talking about reusing the nuclear waste that already exists and is going to go into the ground for 1,000 years. We are talking about reusing that. We are not talking about building new reactors but about reusing fuel with new technology that we have in Canada, which is very safe. That approach would provide electricity worth $1.5 billion. What is wrong with coming up with an innovative idea, reusing—let me repeat, instead of putting it in the ground, reusing—this nuclear waste to deal with 50,000 tonnes of highly toxic nuclear waste that is sitting out there?

Business of Supply May 8th, 2018

Madam Speaker, we are saying that a carbon tax is a heavy burden on Canadian taxpayers. That is why Conservatives are opposed to a carbon tax. We are not saying we need a national policy. We have already opposed that. What I said in my speech today is that there are alternatives we can use to ensure that we meet our goals. At the Paris conference we addressed solutions to climate change, one of which I have outlined very clearly, and that is to reuse nuclear waste fuel.