- Member of Parliament
- Member of Parliament
- Conservative
- Dufferin—Caledon
- Ontario
- Voting Attendance: 64%
- Expenses Last Quarter: $136,309.03
- Government Page
- May/30/24 2:40:30 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, it is unbelievable. This would save 35¢ a litre on gasoline. That does not mean much to ministers, who get driven around by chauffeurs in their limos and probably have not pumped gas nor known the cost of gas in about 10 years. However, for the average Canadian family, it would mean everything, and the Liberals could do something about it. I know they do not take road trips, but Canadian families do, and it would make a difference.
The Liberals have a choice. They can vote to take those taxes off and save Canadians 35¢ a litre so they can take a road trip, or they can continue to punish Canadians with this damn carbon tax.
121 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Dec/12/23 1:57:21 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, the hypocrisy of the member is astounding. He says we should listen to President Zelenskyy. Well, what he said on Canada exporting gas turbines is that it was “absolutely unacceptable”. “Moreover, it is dangerous not only for Ukraine, but also for all countries of the democratic world.”
President Zelenskyy called on the Canadian government to reverse the decision. Where was the member when that was going on? Was he condemning his government? Was he standing up and saying that we have to listen to President Zelenskyy? No. The member was quiet as a church mouse on an issue that is serious: a gas turbine being used to pump Russian gas to fund the war in Ukraine.
He did not listen to President Zelenskyy then, but somehow it is outrageous that we disagree with President Zelenskyy on a trade agreement. How does the member square his hypocrisy?
152 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Apr/21/23 11:43:14 a.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, it is astounding how the Liberals gaslight Canadians. Kim knows about the grocery rebate because Kim looked into the budget. Kim says, “Despite the grocery rebate, I have to choose between heating my home or buying food”.
The answer from the member and the arrogant, out-of-touch government suggests that Kim does not have a problem and that we should not be asking the question. It is audacious and despicable of people to gaslight and diminish Canadians who are struggling to make ends meet. Will they finally show they actually give a damn about Canadians and cut the carbon tax?
105 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Madam Speaker, if a person lives in a riding like mine, Dufferin—Caledon, and does not have any gasoline, and the production of gasoline is stopped, they are going to have a hard time getting to work. In the town of Orangeville there are six charging stations, six for a town of 30,000 people.
What I would suggest is this. We can transition in a responsible manner. I do not know how long that transition is going to take, but I can tell colleagues that it is not going to come anywhere near the timelines the government is talking about. It is so woefully behind on the charging network. It has no plan whatsoever for how we are going to triple electricity generation in this country. The provinces cannot afford it.
RBC has put out a report stating that the path to net zero is $2 trillion. How much has the government allocated for any of it? The answer is not even 10% of it.
167 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Mar/3/22 3:48:07 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, that is a legitimate question.
What the member from the Green Party ignores is that, often, natural gas is replacing far more carbon-intensive and dirtier fuels such as coal-fired electricity plants. When we talk about using natural gas, what we are actually doing is taking a much higher-polluting source of energy and replacing it with a much lower-polluting source of energy. That, in itself, is a win.
Of course, we dream of the day when we are all powered by solar and, who knows, even cold fusion, but those days are not here. We are living in this reality, and right now natural gas can actually provide the global security that we need. I hope all members will vote for this motion.
128 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Mar/3/22 3:46:47 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, you are making me feel old.
The nature of that question, quite frankly, is shameful. Energy security is one of the reasons why there has been such an issue with appeasing Vladimir Putin and the Russian Federation. The threat of natural gas being shut off to Europe was a tool he used to try to exert his influence.
We can actually do multiple things at once. Maybe the New Democrats can only do one thing, and say, “We can only do this, and therefore we do not think about that”. We can actually think about planning for a future where Canadian natural gas can provide energy security around the world, while we do other things. We in the Conservative Party, in the opposition, can walk and chew gum at the same time.
136 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Mar/3/22 3:44:52 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, I am not sure what the question actually was, but I will say this.
As I said in my speech, the need for natural gas is going to go up by an estimated 22% by 2040. We can pretend that we are going to live in a world where we do not need natural gas and that renewables are going to magically take over all of our energy needs. That world does not exist. Until it does, we actually need things such as natural gas. Why do we not use the cleanest, safest natural gas in the world to help countries around the world and, of course, help Canadians and the Canadian economy?
115 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- menumenu
- notificationsnotifications
- home
- mailmail
- searchsearch
