House of Commons Hansard #222 of the 36th Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament's site.) The word of the day was horses.

Topics

Youth Criminal Justice ActGovernment Orders

5:25 p.m.

Reform

Eric C. Lowther Reform Calgary Centre, AB

Mr. Speaker, I understand there are not too many minutes left in the debate, but I would like to make a few comments on the topic.

The youth justice bill we are talking about today and the whole initiative of the minister are interesting. I tend to suggest we have to think about the bill as dealing with the problem at the end of the process, at the end of the issue. When we have a young person that has been incarcerated or is in serious trouble, something has gone on prior to that. The whole legislation deals with the end of the process.

It is interesting with some of the tragic events that have occurred in Taber and south of the border that there is a cry for increased parental responsibility. There are some elements of that in the legislation, in particular with regard to the accountability of parents for failing to supervise their child once charged and then put in their care. If they fail to properly supervise that child they can be held accountable. We think that is good legislation that came largely out of an initiative of one of the members of our party.

I submit to the House and to all Canadians that responsibility is important, but it comes along with something else we have undermined in society. The government has in fact been instrumental in undermining it, and that is respect for the role of parents, respect for the authority that parents should have in their own homes. Parents must be able to establish limits on their children at an early age. They must be free to do that without fear of some sort of social child advocacy agency coming down on them.

That is in no way to condone neglect or abuse, certainly not. Not every parent is a bad parent. Many parents are doing a great job. If we are to hold parents responsible, we must also respect the authority and the role of parents. That speaks to what the hon. member from the Conservative Party just spoke about, the role of the family. Parents are the heads of the family.

I am concerned right now that in Canada there are those who are undermining the authority of parents. There is a court challenge ongoing in Canada today funded by the Liberal Party court challenges program. That court challenge is to strike down section 43 of the Criminal Code. Section 43 of the Criminal Code allows parents to apply reasonable force in the disciplining of their children.

Some of the child advocates do not think parents should have that right. They have gone to court to try to strike down that law, using the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child largely as their undermining moral legitimatization of the court challenge. This undermining, this taking away of the freedoms and the authority of parents in their own homes to limit what their children view, to limit the people they associate with, to apply appropriate discipline, as necessary, as the parents see fit, is a key part of undermining the care that Canadian children are given.

Parents know best what their children need. There are those in the House and in some child advocacy groups that feel they know best and parents are there to help the state or the academic expert decide what is best for children.

We should start to respect the role of parents and allow parents to structure and discipline in their own homes, free from the fear of some child advocate or some child police agency coming down on them and charging them for disciplining their children. Otherwise that is where the breakdown begins.

Mr. Speaker, when you and I were in school some stern discipline was applied. I know at times I was a recipient of that discipline. It did not hurt me any and I am sure it did not hurt you any.

Youth Criminal Justice ActGovernment Orders

5:25 p.m.

The Deputy Speaker

I did not get it.

Youth Criminal Justice ActGovernment Orders

5:25 p.m.

Reform

Eric C. Lowther Reform Calgary Centre, AB

Oh, you did not get it. We have to respect the role that teachers and all those who care for children play. When parents delegate the care of their children to others, they also decide on the type of discipline which will be applied. That is the kind of authority that needs to be passed on if we are going to pass on responsibility because those two go hand in hand.

The House resumed from May 3 consideration of the motion; and of the amendment.

SupplyGovernment Orders

5:30 p.m.

The Deputy Speaker

It being 5.30 p.m., the House will now proceed to the taking of the deferred recorded division on the amendment relating to the Business of Supply.

Call in the members.

(The House divided on the amendment, which was negatived on the following division:)

Division No. 391Government Orders

6 p.m.

The Speaker

I declare the amendment defeated.

The next question is on the main motion. Is it the pleasure of the House to adopt the said motion?

Division No. 391Government Orders

6 p.m.

Some hon. members

Agreed.

Division No. 391Government Orders

6 p.m.

Some hon. members

No.

Division No. 391Government Orders

6 p.m.

The Speaker

All those in favour of the motion will please say yea.

Division No. 391Government Orders

6 p.m.

Some hon. members

Yea.

Division No. 391Government Orders

6 p.m.

The Speaker

All those opposed will please say nay.

Division No. 391Government Orders

6 p.m.

Some hon. members

Nay.

Division No. 391Government Orders

6 p.m.

The Speaker

In my opinion the nays have it.

And more than five members having risen:

(The House divided on the motion, which was negatived on the following division:)

Division No. 392Government Orders

6:10 p.m.

The Speaker

I declare the motion defeated.

The House resumed from May 4 consideration of Bill C-71, an act to implement certain provisions of the budget tabled in Parliament on February 16, 1999, as reported (with amendments) from the committee.

Budget Implementation Act, 1999Government Orders

6:10 p.m.

The Speaker

The House will now proceed to the taking of the deferred recorded division on the motion at the report stage of Bill C-71. The question is on Motion No. 1.

Budget Implementation Act, 1999Government Orders

6:10 p.m.

Liberal

Bob Kilger Liberal Stormont—Dundas, ON

Mr. Speaker, I think you would find unanimous consent for the members who voted on the previous motion, with the exception of the hon. member for Kingston and the Islands who will be taken out and the hon. member for LaSalle—Émard who will be added, to be recorded as having voted on the motion now before the House, with Liberal members voting nay.

Budget Implementation Act, 1999Government Orders

6:10 p.m.

The Speaker

Is there agreement to proceed in such a fashion?

Budget Implementation Act, 1999Government Orders

6:10 p.m.

Some hon. members

Agreed.

Budget Implementation Act, 1999Government Orders

6:10 p.m.

Reform

Chuck Strahl Reform Fraser Valley, BC

Mr. Speaker, Reform Party members present also vote no to this motion.

Budget Implementation Act, 1999Government Orders

6:10 p.m.

Bloc

Stéphane Bergeron Bloc Verchères, QC

Mr. Speaker, it goes without saying that Bloc Quebecois members support this excellent motion.

Budget Implementation Act, 1999Government Orders

6:10 p.m.

NDP

Michelle Dockrill NDP Bras D'Or, NS

Mr. Speaker, New Democrats will be voting no.

Budget Implementation Act, 1999Government Orders

6:10 p.m.

Progressive Conservative

André Harvey Progressive Conservative Chicoutimi, QC

Mr. Speaker, the Progressive Conservative members vote no to this motion.

(The House divided on Motion No. 1, which was negatived on the following division:)

Division No. 393Government Orders

May 5th, 1999 / 6:10 p.m.

The Speaker

I declare Motion No. 1 defeated.

Division No. 393Government Orders

6:10 p.m.

LaSalle—Émard Québec

Liberal

Paul Martin LiberalMinister of Finance

moved that the bill be concurred in.