- Member of Parliament
- Member of Parliament
- Conservative
- Sherwood Park—Fort Saskatchewan
- Alberta
- Voting Attendance: 67%
- Expenses Last Quarter: $170,231.20
- Government Page
- May/29/24 9:49:13 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Chair, we put forward a motion at the government operations committee asking for any contracts to which the federal government is a party. The Liberals have been filibustering to block the release of those contracts. If no contracts existed, I suspect Liberals would not be motivated to filibuster to block their release.
Will the minister agree to release any contracts to which the federal government is a party, involving these drug programs?
73 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Dec/14/23 11:27:50 a.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, I want to ask the NDP a question specifically on the issue of replacement workers.
Originally, the Conservatives, the NDP and the Bloc were working together to try to bring to light contracts signed by the government that seemed to allow foreign replacement workers to be brought in on publicly subsidized projects. In fact, the NDP leader asked a question in the House in which he expressed the view that these contracts should be made public. However, since then, the NDP has flip-flopped, voted with the Liberals to bury the contracts and suggested that we just do an ATIP request instead. We all know the problems associated with the ATIP system. Parliamentary committees have a right to request unfettered access to documents.
Why did the NDP flip-flop, abandon workers, give in to the Liberal filibuster and agree to support the government's efforts to bury the contracts?
151 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Jun/13/23 8:33:29 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, I thank the parliamentary secretary for his reflections on this issue.
I think an important distinction should be made between whether the rules are being used and whether the rules are good for the institution.
I can say that for me personally, these hybrid rules have made my life a lot more comfortable. They have been convenient for me personally, and I have used them from time to time, but I also think they diminish the institution. While they are in place, I will use the voting app, but I think this place would be better off if some of the hybrid provisions were not in effect, which is an important distinction between whether members are using it today versus whether members view these rules as being good for the institution in general.
The biggest problem I have with a hybrid Parliament is the strain it has created on our resources. Before these rules were in place, parliamentary committees could sit basically when they wanted to sit. They could sit into the evening. We have a situation now in the public accounts committee, where Liberals are filibustering a motion, and the committee cannot move forward because it is stuck in these limited time slots.
I will acknowledge that other parties engage in filibusters as well and that it is not just one party, but if committees have work they need to get done or if there is an urgent issue, they should be able to sit more. When I was a staff member, the industry committee sat in the evening for five hours at a time for three nights in a row because there was an issue that justified it.
These rules no longer allow committees to be masters of their own domain. They make committees subject to determinations by the whips in the House about those resources—
311 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Jun/5/23 4:01:33 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, that is an excellent question from my colleague.
It is a generally a pleasure working together on the public accounts committee, although today we had to sit through extensive filibustering from the Liberals because they do not want to allow us to look at documents from the Trudeau Foundation. Nonetheless, it is usually a pleasure, and any lack of pleasure is not the fault of the hon. member.
The third recommendation, which the member points out, calls on the Government of Canada to consider requiring Crown corporations to divulge all expenditures in the same manner as federal departments, and it goes on from there. As the member would recall, sometimes we have to negotiate to break through filibusters with government members of the public accounts committee. If I remember right, I suspect that there was some negotiation required. I would have preferred a stronger recommendation there, but it points in the right direction.
155 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Jun/1/23 12:09:31 a.m.
- Watch
You are filibustering on public accounts.
6 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Jun/1/23 12:08:25 a.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, that was the kind of unmitigated nonsense the House has come to expect in this situation, unfortunately.
I would submit to the member he should read the annual report of the Trudeau Foundation, which notes the membership of the foundation and which notes that the Prime Minister remains a member of the foundation. It is in the last annual report. There are fewer than 30 members. A substantial number of those members are appointed by either the Trudeau family or the Minister of Industry, and this foundation received $125 million from the government.
I do not dispute the foundation aspires to provide scholarships to students, but the member should not dispute the fact there was a massive injection of foreign donations to the foundation when the government took office, and that there was a close ongoing relationship between the government, the Trudeau family and this foundation.
The core point I raised in my original question and will raise again is the following. If all this is great work, then why the secrecy? Why will the people from the Trudeau Foundation not show up? Why are Liberals filibustering our motion to try to get documents? If it is all above board, why the secrecy?
205 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Madam Speaker, we are less than an hour into debate on this important government bill on Afghanistan, debate that is, in my view, a year and a half too late. It shows the partisan political approach of the Liberals to immediately try to throw this important debate about Afghanistan over the side and shift to something else.
Beyond that, I would challenge the member to actually be aware of what is happening in the foreign affairs committee. The study that allegedly I have been filibustering has actually finished now. We have been through four hearings at the foreign affairs committee on that study, and I would invite the member to listen to some of the very thoughtful and insightful witnesses. We heard some witnesses from western NGOs. We also heard witnesses from throughout the developing world who shared their particular perspective on these issues.
I would welcome the member to actually come to the committee, as I have never seen her there before, to review the blues, listen to the witnesses and maybe be aware of what is actually happening at committee before she tries to divert an important debate on Afghanistan with something else.
195 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- menumenu
- notificationsnotifications
- home
- mailmail
- searchsearch
