T.A. Bud BRADLEY

BRADLEY, T.A. Bud, C.D., D.D.S.

Personal Data

Party
Progressive Conservative
Constituency
Haldimand--Norfolk (Ontario)
Birth Date
April 30, 1938
Website
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bud_Bradley
PARLINFO
http://www.parl.gc.ca/parlinfo/Files/Parliamentarian.aspx?Item=82a7280e-c033-4d44-9582-d2d19a1d1af9&Language=E&Section=ALL
Profession
dentist

Parliamentary Career

May 22, 1979 - December 14, 1979
PC
  Haldimand--Norfolk (Ontario)
February 18, 1980 - July 9, 1984
PC
  Haldimand--Norfolk (Ontario)
September 4, 1984 - October 1, 1988
PC
  Haldimand--Norfolk (Ontario)
  • Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Supply and Services (November 1, 1984 - October 14, 1986)
  • Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of National Defence (October 15, 1986 - November 20, 1988)

Most Recent Speeches (Page 5 of 60)


September 22, 1987

Mr. Bud Bradley (Parliamentary Secretary to Minister of National Defence):

Deflator Percentage

Year Rate Increase1971- 72 7.3 (1.5)1972- 73 10.5 '' (5.3)1973- 74 8.2 2.61974- 75 17.4 (4.3)1975- 76 14.0 4.01976- 77 10.4 2.51977- 78 8.8 3.01978- 79 6.3 2.51979- 80 7.1 (0.2)1980- 81 12.1 3.21981- 82 15.2 3.11982- 83 10.1 5.31983- 84 6.5 7.11984- 85 6,0 5.61985- 86 5,6 (2.8)1986- 87 4,7 (forecast) 2.6 (forecast1987- 88 4.7 (forecast) 0.3 (forecast)

Order Paper Questions

GNE Deflator

Deflator Percentage

Year Rate Increase 1971-72 3.6 2.0 1972-73 5.4 (0.7) 1973-74 10.9 0.1 1974-75 15.1 (2.4) 1975-76 10.1 7.7 1976-77 9.2 3.6 1977-78 7.0 4.7 1978-79 6.9 1.9 1979-80 11.4 (4.1) 1980-81 11.2 4.0 1981-82 10.4 7.5 1982-83 9.4 6.0 1983-84 9.2 4.4 1984-85 2.8 8.9 1985-86 3.4 (0.7) 1986-87 2.9 (forecast) 4.4 (forecast)1987-88 3.9 (forecast) 1.1 (forecast)

2. Yes, in 1985-86.

Topic:   ROUTINE PROCEEDINGS
Subtopic:   QUESTIONS ON THE ORDER PAPER
Full View Permalink

August 31, 1987

Mr. Bradley:

For example, for Canada to take over the responsibility of the air defence alone would cost over $5 billion. I would ask: Where are the savings that the NDP proposes?

As a useful and effective international player Canada would lose the following benefits of membership by withdrawing

August 31, 1987

from NATO: the privilege of discussing with our allies the evolution of East-West relations and making our voice heard-

Topic:   GOVERNMENT ORDERS
Subtopic:   PRIVATE MEMBERS' BUSINESS-MOTIONS NUCLEAR ARMAMENTS ADVISABILITY OF DECLARING CANADA A NUCLEAR ARMS FREE ZONE
Full View Permalink

August 31, 1987

Mr. Bradley:

Some NATO countries have, either as a matter of government policy or by parliamentary resolution, decided that nuclear weapons should not, for the present, be stationed on their soil. Canada is among these countries which include Denmark, Iceland, Norway and Spain. However, these nations continue to share fully in the risks and responsibilities of Alliance collective security.

Alliance members, Canada included, have acknowledged publicly the critical requirement to maintain the continuance of nuclear and conventional deterrents as a pre-requisite to undiminished security at lower levels of armament.

Declaring Canada a nuclear weapons free zone would, first, be without precedent in NATO, as no other Alliance member has taken this course. Its consequences in terms of Alliance relationships cannot be predicted with certainty. Second, it would be incompatible with Canada's continued membership in NATO and NORAD, and, in particular, with participation in the NATO Nuclear Planning Group, which affords Canada the opportunity to consult on nuclear policy, including arms control affecting nuclear weapons.

This policy reflects the NDP's vision of a little Canada divorced from that larger community of states with which we share our traditions and basic political and social values.

Topic:   GOVERNMENT ORDERS
Subtopic:   PRIVATE MEMBERS' BUSINESS-MOTIONS NUCLEAR ARMAMENTS ADVISABILITY OF DECLARING CANADA A NUCLEAR ARMS FREE ZONE
Full View Permalink

August 31, 1987

Mr. Bud Bradley (Parliamentary Secretary to Minister of National Defence):

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to be permitted the opportunity to comment on the motion of the New Democratic Party which would see Canada declaring itself a nuclear weapons free zone. I was disappointed, I must say, though, to hear the Liberal spokesman of his Party going again half-way and only wishing to declare half of Canada a nuclear free zone.

This type of motion has been debated on three previous occasions during Private Members' Business and once during an Opposition Day. The motion before us proposes a course of action for Canada which is unrealistic and hypocritical. The same could be said for the recently announced New Democratic Party's posture on defence.

No NATO members have declared themselves to be nuclear weapon free zones, and there are no NATO countries that prohibit visits by allied ships that may be carrying nuclear weapons.

Topic:   GOVERNMENT ORDERS
Subtopic:   PRIVATE MEMBERS' BUSINESS-MOTIONS NUCLEAR ARMAMENTS ADVISABILITY OF DECLARING CANADA A NUCLEAR ARMS FREE ZONE
Full View Permalink

August 31, 1987

Mr. Bradley:

Some NATO countries have, either as a matter of government policy or by parliamentary resolution, decided that nuclear weapons should not, for the present, be stationed on their soil. Canada is among these countries which include Denmark, Iceland, Norway and Spain. However, these nations continue to share fully in the risks and responsibilities of Alliance collective security.

Alliance members, Canada included, have acknowledged publicly the critical requirement to maintain the continuance of nuclear and conventional deterrents as a pre-requisite to undiminished security at lower levels of armament.

Declaring Canada a nuclear weapons free zone would, first, be without precedent in NATO, as no other Alliance member has taken this course. Its consequences in terms of Alliance relationships cannot be predicted with certainty. Second, it would be incompatible with Canada's continued membership in NATO and NORAD, and, in particular, with participation in the NATO Nuclear Planning Group, which affords Canada the opportunity to consult on nuclear policy, including arms control affecting nuclear weapons.

This policy reflects the NDP's vision of a little Canada divorced from that larger community of states with which we share our traditions and basic political and social values.

Topic:   GOVERNMENT ORDERS
Subtopic:   PRIVATE MEMBERS' BUSINESS-MOTIONS NUCLEAR ARMAMENTS ADVISABILITY OF DECLARING CANADA A NUCLEAR ARMS FREE ZONE
Full View Permalink