Debates of June 1st, 2000

Budget Implementation Act, 2000

[Some hon. members]

Yea.

[The Deputy Speaker]

All those opposed will please say nay.

[Some hon. members]

Nay.

[The Deputy Speaker]

In my opinion the nays have it.

[Some hon. members]

On division.

[The Deputy Speaker]

I declare Motion No. 2 lost.

(Motion No. 2 negatived)

[Stéphane Dion, Liberal, on behalf of the Minister of Finance]

moved that the bill be concurred in at report stage.

[The Deputy Speaker]

Is it the pleasure of the House to adopt the motion?

[Some hon. members]

Agreed.

[Some hon. members]

No.

[The Deputy Speaker]

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

[Some hon. members]

Yea.

[The Deputy Speaker]

All those opposed will please say nay.

[Some hon. members]

Nay.

[The Deputy Speaker]

In my opinion the yeas have it.

And more than five members having risen:

[The Deputy Speaker]

Call in the members.

And the bells having rung:

[The Deputy Speaker]

At the request of the chief government whip the division is deferred until tomorrow, the effect of which is to defer it until the conclusion of Government Orders on Monday.

[Bob Kilger, Liberal, Stormont—Dundas, ON]

Mr. Speaker, I rise on a point of order. There have been negotiations and discussions among representatives of all parties in the House and I believe if you were to seek unanimous consent that the House would consent to pass report stage of Bill C-32 on division.

[The Deputy Speaker]

Is there unanimous consent to rescind the deferral of the division on Bill C-32 and that the bill be concurred in at report stage at this time?

[Some hon. members]

Agreed.

(Motion agreed to)

The House resumed from May 9 consideration of the motion that Bill C-31, an act respecting immigration to Canada and the granting of refugee protection to persons who are displaced, persecuted or in danger, be read the second time and referred to a committee.

Immigration And Protection Refugee Act

[Rahim Jaffer, Reform, Edmonton Strathcona, AB]

Mr. Speaker, it is a pleasure to see democracy in action in this place. I always take pride in standing up to speak to immigration issues. I often remind the House of my family's background and how proud I am as a Canadian to be able to serve as a member of parliament.

I came to Canada in the early seventies as a year old child. My family was forced out of our home country of Uganda as refugees. We came to Canada with mixed feelings. We were coming to a brand new country, a new place, as strangers. We left home where I was third generation born. Unfortunately we were leaving under the tyrant regime of Idi Amin. They were not pleasant circumstances. Members of my family lost everything when they left that country: their businesses, their homes and all their money. They came to this country as penniless refugees.

On one note we were saddened having to leave that country. On the same note we were very fortunate to be embraced by this great country where opportunity and freedom are often taken for granted. This is something I know the Canadian Alliance takes very seriously. I am glad to be able to serve as a member of parliament 28 years later and to be able to stand up for those things about which I feel so dearly. I know a number of Canadians feel proud to stand up for democracy and freedom.

We have to take steps back from time to time to remind us of how important those ideas are, especially in light of what happened to my family and what happens to millions of people around the world in unfortunate regimes where human rights and democracy are taken for granted.

As Canadians we can be leaders and show the world how diversity and strength in diversity exist in Canada. We can share that information and be leaders around the world, hopefully bringing democracy and human rights to a lot of countries that do not have those practises.

That is neither here nor there. Today we are discussing at second reading Bill C-31, the immigration and refugee protection act. When reviewing this bill and the changes being proposed, the Minister of Citizenship and Immigration touts the new legislation as being tough. It is to fix many of the problems currently faced within Canada's immigration system today. The truth is that the bill will not accomplish its objectives. It is likely to significantly slow down the entire immigration system.

At this time resources are limited. We have problems within the refugee process. We have problems of immigrants wanting to go through a fair process to be evaluated before they come to Canada. The last thing we need is for our immigration system to slow down, which would unfortunately encourage the illegal entrance of immigrants. We will see more problems like the Chinese boat people and people profiting from trying to get people into the country illegally. That is something we want to try to stop. The best way to do it is to look at ways that will speed up the process and attach more resources to the immigration system, not slow it down.

No matter what is contained in the new act, it will never be effective if the government does not ensure improved management of the system, better training, tighter auditing and more emphasis on enforcement. This is what I was referring to, especially when I mentioned the problems we faced in our immigration and refugee system over the last number of years. They were ever so present last summer when we saw many problems with refugees coming to the country illegally and many people profiting from that.

This is the first complete overhaul of Canada's immigration laws in 24 years. It was a good attempt to try to improve our current system. Some amendments have been made to the current Immigration Act, introduced to the House of Commons in 1976, the most notable of which were changes to Canada's refugee determination system in the late 1980s with the creation of the Immigration Refugee Board. This change was brought about by the controversial 1985 Singh decision that stated all refugee claimants were to be allowed an oral hearing of their claim and the right to appeal a negative decision.

Since that time successive governments have interpreted the decision to mean that all refugee claimants, in fact any foreign national on Canadian soil, should be given the full protection of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. This interpretation of the Singh decision is a major contributing factor to Canada becoming the number one target for people traffickers and asylum seekers the world over. It has allowed our immigration and refugee system to become overly bureaucratic and prone to legal delays. The minister of immigration had a real opportunity—

[The Speaker]

Order, please. I will interrupt the hon. member at this point. He will have 15 minutes remaining after question period.

Unesco Institute For Statistics

[Yvon Charbonneau, Liberal, Anjou—Rivière-Des-Prairies, QC]

Mr. Speaker, it gives me great pleasure to salute in this House the decision recently made by UNESCO to establish its new institute for statistics in Montreal. The institute will be the first of eight UNESCO units to be located in North America.

The presence of this institute in Montreal will have an economic impact of some $60 million over 10 years. Some thirty jobs will be created within the next year, and the number of employees could quickly double.

Our Minister of Foreign Affairs said that “the dynamic character of Montreal and its many research centres, complete with state-of-the-art facilities, will prove to be a crucial factor in the development and growth of UNESCO's new institute”.

This project also received the support of the Friendship Group of Parliamentarians for UNESCO, which believes that the establishment of this institute could help substantially raise UNESCO's profile in Canada and North America, while also ensuring it desirable international influence.

Hepatitis C

[Grant Hill, Reform, Macleod, AB]

Mr. Speaker, the hepatitis C scandal from tainted blood has not been forgotten. Let me summarize this tragedy.

Contaminated blood was not tested in Canada when other countries were carefully screening theirs. Canada imported dirty blood from prisons in Arkansas. Thousands of Canadians are sick because our watchdog, particularly the federal watchdog, failed them. Judge Krever's study recommended helping every sick victim. Yet federal Liberals chose to compensate victims only between 1986 and 1990.

Over two years after that promise only the lawyers have been paid any compensation. The Harris government in Ontario has agreed to compensate all victims, which is quite a contrast. Federal Liberals were forced to vote against the forgotten victims outside the 1986 to 1990 period. My question is why.