Ken DRYDEN

DRYDEN, The Hon. Ken, P.C., O.C., B.A., LL.B.

Personal Data

Party
Liberal
Constituency
York Centre (Ontario)
Birth Date
August 8, 1947
Website
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ken_Dryden
PARLINFO
http://www.parl.gc.ca/parlinfo/Files/Parliamentarian.aspx?Item=7c4fb0aa-5ca9-4d09-acb7-fdc3a914ab53&Language=E&Section=ALL
Profession
executive manager, lawyer, professional hockey player, writer

Parliamentary Career

June 28, 2004 - November 29, 2005
LIB
  York Centre (Ontario)
  • Minister of Social Development (July 20, 2004 - February 5, 2006)
January 23, 2006 - September 7, 2008
LIB
  York Centre (Ontario)
  • Minister of Social Development (July 20, 2004 - February 5, 2006)
October 14, 2008 - March 26, 2011
LIB
  York Centre (Ontario)

Most Recent Speeches (Page 1 of 68)


March 9, 2011

Hon. Ken Dryden (York Centre, Lib.)

Mr. Speaker, this is Israeli Apartheid Week. Universities are great places to discuss, debate and criticize and yet Israeli Apartheid Week often is not about discussion and debate. It is about intimidation and hate, where one voice overpowers and silences others and cuts them off.

Israel is not an apartheid state and yet if there is anything we have learned from the great slayer of South African apartheid, Nelson Mandela, conflict cannot be resolved with hate, because even if people do win they must live with one another. Living with one another is not just about talking, but listening; not just about knowing, but learning; not just about being right, but creating something better.

Our students have 60 or more years of their lives ahead of them. They will change Canada. They will create the global world of the future. It is time for students involved in Israeli Apartheid Week to move on to something worthy of all that is in them, something worthy of the future.

The really sad part of Israeli Apartheid Week is that our students and our universities can do much better.

Topic:   Statements By Members
Subtopic:   Israeli Apartheid Week
Full View Permalink

February 8, 2011

Hon. Ken Dryden (York Centre, Lib.)

Mr. Speaker, the Minister of Human Resources and Skills Development likes to talk about choice. Let us talk about choice.

Let us talk about average middle-class families with both parents or one parent in the workplace; their income stagnant or worse; with a mortgage and car payments; and having their kids in child care, with each place costing more than $8,000 a year and the Conservatives' so-called child care benefit providing less than $1,000 a year after taxes.

Let us talk about average parents, at home or not, who worry about their kids and know that for them the only real security and opportunity in the future is in learning; who want their kids to have a lot of experiences with other kids, other adults, in a lot of different places and settings; who need their kids to arrive at the kindergarten door ready to learn, and who know that for better child care facilities, and for attracting and keeping better teachers and for better learning for the future, the Conservatives' $1,000 benefit offers no choice.

That is the difference. With the Conservatives: no choice. With the Liberals, whether one is at home or not, in real life: real choice.

Topic:   Statements By Members
Subtopic:   Child Care
Full View Permalink

January 31, 2011

Hon. Ken Dryden

With respect to Veterans Affairs Canada (VAC) and the recommendation made by the Special Needs Advisory Group (SNAG) in 2006 that VAC employ veterans: (a) what action has VAC taken to implement the recommendation; (b) what response, if any, has been provided to SNAG on the recommendation; and (c) what analysis has been completed by VAC on the feasibility of this recommendation and what were the conclusions or findings?

Topic:   Routine Proceedings
Subtopic:   Questions on the Order Paper
Full View Permalink

January 31, 2011

Hon. Ken Dryden

With regard to the President of the Treasury Board and Minister for the Asia-Pacific Gateway, what are the exact, line-by-line details of all travel and hospitality expenses incurred by the Minister and all exempt staff since January 1, 2009?

Topic:   Routine Proceedings
Subtopic:   Questions on the Order Paper
Full View Permalink

January 31, 2011

Hon. Ken Dryden

With regard to a possible tax evasion scheme in Liechtenstein known as "Project Jade" and the information that, as of June 10, 2010, Canada Revenue Agency (CRA) was informed that 106 residents of Canada have over $100 million dollars in accounts in Liechtenstein and subsequently reassessed 26 cases which revealed a total of approximately $5.2 million in unpaid federal taxes, interest, fines and penalties: (a) what is the breakdown of the $5.2 million assessed from the 26 cases, specifically in (i) unpaid taxes, (ii) interest, (iii) fines, (iv) penalties; (b) how much of the $5.2 million has been collected; (c) how many of these cases are under appeal; (d) how many cases remain open; (e) how many of the 26 cases have been closed, meaning that the full amount of taxes, interest and penalties have been collected; (f) what is the breakdown (money collected in taxes, interest, fines and penalties) for each case; (g) how many of the account holders in the 26 cases have made partial payments and, of these partial repayments, what was the (i) largest amount, (ii) smallest amount, (iii) average amount; (h) how much does CRA anticipate it has yet to collect in (i) taxes, (ii) interest, (iii) fines, (iv) penalties; (i) with regard to the amount of money contained in the Liechtenstein accounts declared or discovered by the CRA, what was the (i) largest amount, (ii) smallest amount, (iii) average amount; (j) on what date was the CRA first made aware of the names of Canadians with accounts in Liechtenstein; (k) on what date did CRA begin its investigation; (l) on what date was the first audit of an individual account holder done; (m) how many of the 106 Canadians with accounts in Liechtenstein have had these accounts audited, reassessed or been the subject of compliance action; (n) how many of the 106 Canadians with accounts in Liechtenstein have not been audited, reassessed or been the subject of compliance action; and (o) how many tax evasion charges have been laid?

Topic:   Routine Proceedings
Subtopic:   Questions Passed as Orders for Return
Full View Permalink