Debates of Oct. 5th, 2010
House of Commons Hansard #77 of the 40th Parliament, 3rd Session. (The original version is on Parliament's site.) The word of the day was years.
Topics
- Question Period
- Privacy Commissioner of Canada
- Protecting Canadians by Ending Sentence Discounts for Multiple Murders Act
- Committees of the House
- Income Tax Act
- Business of the House
- Petitions
- Questions on the Order Paper
- Standing up for Victims of White Collar Crime Act
- Serious Time for the Most Serious Crime Act
- Breast Cancer Awareness
- Small Business
- National Youth Centre Day in Quebec
- Holyrood Community League
- National Family Week
- Lou Gehrig's Disease
- World Sight Day
- World Teachers’ Day
- Justice
- Huntington's Disease
- Justice
- Newfoundland and Labrador
- Leader of the Liberal Party of Canada
- National Women's Centres Day
- Family Caregivers
- Employment Insurance
- Government Priorities
- Ministerial Responsibility
- Foreign Takeovers
- Air Canada
- Foreign Takeovers
- Ministerial Responsibility
- Infrastructure
- Afghanistan
- Prime Minister's Office
- Veterans Affairs
- Afghanistan
- International Trade
- Census
- International Trade
- Justice
- National Defence
- Veterans Affairs
- Citizenship and Immigration
- CN Railway
- Taxation
- National Defence
- Census
- Presence in Gallery
- Privilege
- Points of Order
- Privilege
- Serious Time for the Most Serious Crime Act
- Tackling Auto Theft and Property Crime Act
- Lake of the Woods and Rainy River Basins
Serious Time for the Most Serious Crime Act
Government Orders
4 p.m.
NDP
Wayne Marston Hamilton East—Stoney Creek, ON
Mr. Speaker, the member will know that prior to coming here I was part of the labour movement in Hamilton. In Ontario we have the Ontario public service unions and some of those unions are for prison guards. On more than one occasion we have had discussions with those particular people in regard to workplace safety. They told us that we should not to take away the faint hope clause because there was nothing between them and a prisoner, and a prisoner has no hope, there would be no reason in the world for that individual not to murder a prison guard.
We have great empathy for the families of victims and what they suffer through, but on the other side of this case, we do not want further victims in the families of those prison guards.
Serious Time for the Most Serious Crime Act
Government Orders
4 p.m.
NDP
Jim Maloway Elmwood—Transcona, MB
Mr. Speaker, prison guards are the closest to the situation. Since they deal with inmates on a personal basis day in and day out, week after week, month after month, year after year, we do need to pay some attention to their observations. I know they support keeping the faint hope clause but even they too may be willing to have the concept tweaked and changed a bit. Even they would not write it off and say that absolutely no changes. If the changes are reasonable, they may go along with them.
Many organizations have pointed out that this is a worthwhile program. Even if we plumbed it down, I think a lot of government members would support it, but they are being whipped by their management. They do not have an independent idea among all 143 of them over there because--
Serious Time for the Most Serious Crime Act
Government Orders
4 p.m.
Conservative
The Deputy Speaker Andrew Scheer
Order, please. I can take one more brief question or comment. The hon. member for Nanaimo--Alberni.
Serious Time for the Most Serious Crime Act
Government Orders
4 p.m.
Conservative
James Lunney Nanaimo—Alberni, BC
Mr. Speaker, the member quoted the member for Windsor—Tecumseh who stated earlier in the debate that families of victims should perhaps not be notified when a murderer applies for early parole, say after 15 years, like the families of the victims of Karla Homolka and Paul Bernardo for example.
I wonder if the member supports the position that families of victims should not be notified when an inmate applies for early parole under the existing system.
Serious Time for the Most Serious Crime Act
Government Orders
4 p.m.
NDP
Jim Maloway Elmwood—Transcona, MB
Mr. Speaker, perhaps the member should re-read the speech of the member for Windsor—Tecumseh. I heard him definitely say that we should go further and maybe even compensate victims. If a victim or family member has to go to a hearing and that hearing is adjourned or cancelled, those individuals should be compensated for their costs.
The member for Nanaimo—Alberni is totally wrong in what he is representing because the member for Windsor—Tecumseh did talk about the rights of victims.
Serious Time for the Most Serious Crime Act
Government Orders
4:05 p.m.
Conservative
Serious Time for the Most Serious Crime Act
Government Orders
4:05 p.m.
Some hon. members
Question.
Serious Time for the Most Serious Crime Act
Government Orders
4:05 p.m.
Conservative
The Deputy Speaker Andrew Scheer
The question is on the motion. Is it the pleasure of the House to adopt the motion?
Serious Time for the Most Serious Crime Act
Government Orders
4:05 p.m.
Some hon. members
Agreed.
No.
Serious Time for the Most Serious Crime Act
Government Orders
4:05 p.m.
Conservative
Serious Time for the Most Serious Crime Act
Government Orders
4:05 p.m.
Some hon. members
Yea.
Serious Time for the Most Serious Crime Act
Government Orders
4:05 p.m.
Conservative
Serious Time for the Most Serious Crime Act
Government Orders
4:05 p.m.
Some hon. members
Nay.
Serious Time for the Most Serious Crime Act
Government Orders
4:05 p.m.
Conservative
The Deputy Speaker Andrew Scheer
In my opinion the yeas have it.
And five or more members having risen:
Call in the members.
And the bells having rung:
Accordingly the vote stands deferred until tomorrow at the end of government orders.
Tackling Auto Theft and Property Crime Act
Government Orders
4:05 p.m.
Niagara Falls
Ontario
Conservative
Rob Nicholson Minister of Justice
moved that Bill S-9, An Act to amend the Criminal Code (auto theft and trafficking in property obtained by crime), be read the second time and referred to a committee.
