Justice Committee on Feb. 27th, 2013

[Françoise Boivin, NDP, Gatineau, QC]

Yes.

[Dany Morin, NDP, Chicoutimi—Le Fjord, QC]

That is important. The point here is to vote right. I would like to comment on this motion.

As I mentioned a little earlier, I am torn. I am caught in the middle and unable to determine the right thing to do. As you may not be aware, I have been touring across Canada for a number of months now, as part of a campaign called Pour les Jeunes / For the Kids. Everywhere I go in Canada, people are waiting for the federal government initiative, whatever it may be.

I do not hold it against the Conservatives that they voted against the national anti-bullying strategy in November. I had asked John Baird long before that whether the government was going to present something. When he confirmed that nothing was planned, I introduced the bill. If something has been developed in the corridors of the Conservative Party in the meantime so that another initiative is brought forward in this area, I will support it, if it is decent.

I agree with the first of the three points raised by Mr. Goguen, that Bill C-273 results in legislative contradictions, ambiguities and redundancies. I entirely agree on that.

I also agree on the third point. The third paragraph states that the overwhelming majority of witnesses indicated that there were problems. The two main supporters of Dr. Fry's motion are the police officer and the professor who testified. I can tell you that, when you work on the bullying and cyberbullying file, you see the same witnesses, even in the Senate, which published its report on cyberbullying in mid-December. When I checked the witness list, I saw that it included the same people.

It was not without reason that the Senate also did not recommend amending the Criminal Code as Dr. Fry wanted. It made other suggestions, including a national cyberbullying strategy, the creation of a position of commissioner for children, as well as other measures, but recommended none of what Dr. Fry was proposing. I nevertheless agree that the witnesses who appeared before us do not want this bill.

The second paragraph—and it is because of it that I would be uncomfortable voting for this motion—states:

Parliamentary review of the bullying issue still is on-going and legislation to introduce this matter is pre-mature.

I do not doubt the Conservative government's good will, but when we talk about

parliamentary review

and about the fact that it is already ongoing, I would like to know what it is. When we debated my bill and Dr. Fry's, you said that the Senate was already studying the issue, and you were right. You did not want to create any redundancy by starting a study by the committee, but, as far as I know, the Senate people have finished with the cyberbullying issue and will now move on to something else. I therefore fail to see what there is that is new. My motion that a national bullying prevention strategy be established is dead. That was the last initiative.

Unless you are alluding to the intergovernmental group created by a minister—I believe it was the Minister of Justice—last November. He said that the purpose of that intergovernmental working group was to reinforce and make amendments to the Criminal Code. The provincial governments were involved, particularly the ministers of public safety. The announcement was made in November, but we subsequently heard little about the project.

If that is what you are referring to, I would like you to tell me about it later. It would help me a great deal to know what that "ongoing" discussion means. There are also the words, "...legislation to introduce this matter is premature."

I was elected on May 2, 2011. Since then, however, five young Canadians have committed suicide after being victims of bullying.

Mr. Goguen has already named them. I am going to repeat their names and offer all my condolences to their families.

The first was Jamie Hubley, of Ottawa, who was bullied. However, there was another factor: he also suffered from mental problems. Bullying nevertheless played a role. He was bullied because of his sexual orientation.

Mitchell Wilson, of Pickering, was 11 years old and suffered from muscular dystrophy. He was bullied at school and in the city's streets because of his disease. He was 11 years old; he put a bag over his head and asphyxiated himself. He committed suicide at the age of 11. That is really too young to die.

Jenna Bowers-Bryanton, of Nova Scotia, was bullied by her schoolmates. She too was unable to bear it any longer. And yet she was a brilliant young girl. I am convinced that she could have survived that trial as an adult.

Marjorie Raymond, from my own province of Quebec, loved to sing and post videos of herself on YouTube. In their comments, people told her to go and kill herself.

Amanda Todd is another example. When I talk about bullying, I do not like to think of Amanda Todd because hers was such an extreme case that it went beyond the conventional problem of bullying suffered by our young people.

They say that legislation on this problem is premature. I am of course in favour of legislation being well constructed. Since I was elected, however, at least five young men and women have committed suicide, according to the media. I am convinced that there have been others whose stories were not reported by the media. This is only the tip of the iceberg. That is not to mention the other young people who manage to make it but who are subsequently scarred by the bullying they have suffered.

I really do not agree with you when you say it is premature. All the witnesses who appeared said the government must play a role. However, they did not necessarily agree on how that should be done.

Some say they entirely agree with me and that a national bullying prevention strategy should be established, regardless of what it contains. Others, such as the witness representing the Institute of Marriage and Family Canada whom we heard earlier today, believe that the federal government's role should be to avoid excessive involvement in the problem and to help the various Canadian communities deal with it on their own.

Even though the Government of Canada is not yet fully playing its role as a leader, several provinces mentioned by Mr. Goguen have adopted measures to combat bullying. That is very good and I support them wholeheartedly. Some school boards and schools have even formed their own anti-bullying programs. These are local efforts. I also offer them my full support. Families across Canada are talking about bullying. That is good too.

As for cyberbullying, something must be done, regardless of how the Government of Canada addresses the problem. Will Dr. Fry's bill achieve that? I do not think so. As I mentioned earlier in my speech, I do not believe that bill will prevent a single case of cyberbullying. When we talk to young people 10 to 15 years of age, they are not afraid of the law. They consider themselves invincible. In my opinion, the only positive aspect of this bill is what concerns adults who are involved in bullying. We must tighten the vise on adults who bully other adults. Adults who bully children: that is unacceptable.

As I mentioned, this bill makes me uncomfortable. I support paragraphs one and three but not paragraph two.

[The Chair, Conservative, Mike Wallace]

I have two more speakers on the list. I have Madame Boivin, and then I have you to finish up. Is that fine?

Madame Boivin.

[Françoise Boivin, NDP, Gatineau, QC]

Mr. Chair, I do not know why, but I will probably say the same thing.

I suggest an amendment to delete paragraph two. Then perhaps we could vote on the motion.

[The Chair, Conservative, Mike Wallace]

Thank you.

Monsieur Goguen.

[Robert Goguen, Conservative, Moncton—Riverview—Dieppe, NB]

I wanted to speak for the same reasons.

I am more than agreeable to removing paragraph 2. What we were referring to was the Senate committee, which is yet to be responded to by the government. So to not create any false illusion, yes I agree that we'll remove paragraph 2.

[The Chair, Conservative, Mike Wallace]

The motion now stands with paragraph 2 withdrawn. Is that understood by everybody, in French and in English?

[Françoise Boivin, NDP, Gatineau, QC]

Yes.

[The Chair, Conservative, Mike Wallace]

Is there anything else to this item? No.

I'll take the vote, and if it passes, I will present this to the House tomorrow.

(Motion as amended agreed to)

That is the end of our meeting regarding Bill C-273. I'll take a one-minute recess for those who don't have to stay, and then for 15 minutes we'll have a meeting of the subcommittee on agenda and procedure. Thank you very much.

The meeting is adjourned.