House of Commons Hansard #81 of the 41st Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament's site.) The word of the day was registry.

Topics

Public Safety
Oral questions

2:25 p.m.

NDP

Charlie Angus Timmins—James Bay, ON

Mr. Speaker, that is a minister who today hides behind guns. Yesterday he hid behind children. At 10 a.m. yesterday, the name of the bill he brought in was called “lawful access”. By 11 a.m., he was being hammered in the media. Therefore, by 11:17 a.m., he changed the name of the bill to “protecting children from Internet predators”. It is about using child victims as political cover so the minister can treat average Canadians like criminals.

Why this abuse of public trust and why this abuse of our child victims?

Public Safety
Oral questions

2:25 p.m.

Provencher
Manitoba

Conservative

Vic Toews Minister of Public Safety

Mr. Speaker, that is rich coming from a party that never stands up for victims.

Canada's laws do not adequately protect children from online exploitation. Everyone understands that. I think there is widespread agreement by Canadians that there is a problem. We want to fix our laws while striking the right balance when it comes to privacy.

We will send this legislation directly to committee for a full and wide-ranging examination of the best way to do what is right for our children.

National Defence
Oral questions

2:25 p.m.

Liberal

Bob Rae Toronto Centre, ON

Mr. Speaker, I am sure that the people who come forward with reasoned amendments will not be called Adolf Hitler, will not be called terrorists, and will not be called friends of pedophilia by the minister.

My question is for the Prime Minister. It has to do with the double standard on the issue of sustainability. The Prime Minister very clearly singled out old age security as an issue of sustainability in his famous speech in Davos. I wonder how he now feels about the F-35 situation, where literally every single one of our allies is saying that the current plan for the plane is not sustainable according to their situations.

When is the Government of Canada going to finally come to grips with the sustainability—

National Defence
Oral questions

2:25 p.m.

Conservative

The Speaker Andrew Scheer

The right hon. Prime Minister.

National Defence
Oral questions

2:25 p.m.

Calgary Southwest
Alberta

Conservative

Stephen Harper Prime Minister

Once again, Mr. Speaker, the Government of Canada, this government and the previous Liberal government for that matter, has been planning to replace the CF-18 when it reaches the useful end of its life in this decade. That is why we have been part of a long-term partnership to plan and to build the new aircraft. In that regard we are operating within a budget, and we will respect that budget.

Public Safety
Oral questions

February 15th, 2012 / 2:25 p.m.

Liberal

Marc Garneau Westmount—Ville-Marie, QC

Mr. Speaker, this week, the government has created a new registry: a registry of our private communications. This registry could contain the following information about each of us: who we call, when we call them, who we send emails to and when we send them. And all this without a warrant. Of course we want to protect our children and the other people of this country, but we must also protect a fundamental right: Canadians' privacy.

Public Safety
Oral questions

2:25 p.m.

Provencher
Manitoba

Conservative

Vic Toews Minister of Public Safety

Mr. Speaker, in fact the legislation that we are bringing forward is legislation which the member's party brought forward. We have refined it in order to deal with some privacy issues.

I think everyone recognizes there is a problem with respect to the proliferation of child pornography online, and we intend to do something about it. I might emphasize there will be no private information shared with the police without a warrant.

Public Safety
Oral questions

2:25 p.m.

Liberal

Ralph Goodale Wascana, SK

Mr. Speaker, the government said the anonymous long form census which never had a security breach was too intrusive, but now, without due process, it wants every Internet transaction recorded. It wants access to every BlackBerry and cellphone. However, it denies access to the secret machinations of Conservative MPs behind closed doors in parliamentary committees.

The Prime Minister implied a few moments ago that he would entertain amendments to Bill C-30. Do we have his guarantee that amendments will in fact be welcomed in the parliamentary committee?

Public Safety
Oral questions

2:25 p.m.

Provencher
Manitoba

Conservative

Vic Toews Minister of Public Safety

Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister indicated that in fact would be the case, that we will entertain amendments. I think the amendments have to be focused on the fact that we have a problem in respect of the proliferation of pedophilia and child pornography online.

We want our laws fixed while striking the right balance when it comes to protecting privacy. It is surprising that the member, when his party was in charge of this very same legislation, felt it was adequate, and yet we had to improve it before we brought it to this House.

Public Safety
Oral questions

2:30 p.m.

NDP

Françoise Boivin Gatineau, QC

Mr. Speaker, I remain skeptical. To date, this government has not proved to be open-minded and has not even considered letting the opposition introduce amendments.

This bill was quickly renamed to give it a title that will allow the minister of public insecurity to constantly give his petty little answers. I have serious doubts. Under this bill, personal information will be provided to the authorities without a warrant for any reason, when service providers already provide the police with the information they request in 94% of cases.

Will the Conservatives scrap this bill—

Public Safety
Oral questions

2:30 p.m.

Conservative

The Speaker Andrew Scheer

Order, please. The hon. Minister of Public Safety.

Public Safety
Oral questions

2:30 p.m.

Provencher
Manitoba

Conservative

Vic Toews Minister of Public Safety

Mr. Speaker, let me emphasize that this legislation in fact brings Canada to the standard where European countries accept exactly the same kind of standard.

It is a legal protection that not only requires a warrant when intrusive information is sought, but also there is an accountability mechanism every time a police officer requests identifying information.

Public Safety
Oral questions

2:30 p.m.

NDP

Françoise Boivin Gatineau, QC

Mr. Speaker, shame on this government, which is making things up as it goes along. It is shameful. Canadians are not foolish enough to believe the minister of insecurity's doublespeak. This bill is useless and endangers the rights and freedoms that are especially important to Canadians. This bill is going to create an unbelievable surveillance machine. Service providers will have to collect and divulge information about all of their clients. Who is going to pay for the government's spy work? Canadians will have to pay for it when their service providers send them the bill.

Do the Conservatives know how much their Big Brother bill is going to cost Canadians?

Public Safety
Oral questions

2:30 p.m.

Provencher
Manitoba

Conservative

Vic Toews Minister of Public Safety

Mr. Speaker, the member, by trying to over-emphasize her point, discredits herself. In fact, the legislation does nothing of the account.

What the legislation in fact does is require a warrant every time there is any need for intrusive evidence, either in emails or web surfing, that is required for the purposes of a criminal charge or an investigation. There is an accountability mechanism. There is no free access to information by police.

Government Programs
Oral questions

2:30 p.m.

NDP

Peter Julian Burnaby—New Westminster, BC

Mr. Speaker, this bill has erased any credibility the minister may have had in relation to this issue.

Ratings agencies Fitch and Moody's say that the Conservatives' planned budget cuts are “a risk to growth”. Moody's key analyst on Canada says that “doing it [cutting] too rapidly has negative effects”. This government wants to slow economic growth even further by cutting tens of thousands of jobs and services as Canadians lose their jobs.

Why do the Conservatives always choose ideology over families? Why do they have such a hard time with common sense? Why are they against common sense?