Lost his last election, in 2011, with 25% of the vote.
Firearms Act June 13th, 1995
Mr. Speaker, I listened intently to the hon. member's speech when he talked about licensing. Yesterday I talked about the importance of representing one's constituents here. As I did so members of the Reform Party kept yelling at me and telling me that somehow I was not representing my constituents by making a decision to vote in favour of the bill.
Firearms Act June 12th, 1995
Mr. Speaker, I too want to be noted as voting against Motion No. 227.
Firearms Act June 12th, 1995
Mr. Speaker, do we get up on a point of order and indicate that or do we just stand up? Please explain. I was voting in favour of the motion. Do you require us to get up on a point of order to do that or do you just look to either side to see who gets up?
Firearms Act June 12th, 1995
Mr. Speaker, there seems to be a bit of misunderstanding on how you vote on these issues. The clerk has looked on both sides of it. Can you explain to members which side you will be looking at first when you are voting?
Firearms Act June 12th, 1995
Mr. Speaker, I rise on a point of order. I was a bit unclear as to what the parliamentary secretary was saying. Is he saying this would not apply to anywhere south of the Northwest Territories, to any aboriginals in Ontario, Quebec and the west?
Firearms Act June 12th, 1995
Mr. Speaker, what the Reform Party never tells its constituents when it talks about free votes is what to do in a situation where your views on an issue are different from your constituents.
If one looks at the polling across the country, one poll may be different, two polls may, but when all polls across the country show support for this legislation it is difficult.
A poll taken in my own riding by the Simcoe Reformer asked a number of questions. It said: "Are you strongly in favour, somewhat in favour, or opposed to the registration of all guns?" Those who strongly support were 33 per cent. Those who strongly opposed were 23 per cent. For somewhat support, there were 26 per cent and somewhat opposed, 19 per cent.
The question I have to look at is: "How do you think your member of Parliament should vote on this issue: For or against the proposal on gun control legislation?"
Of those who had an opinion, 60 per cent said that their member of Parliament should vote for the legislation and 40 per cent said that he should vote against the legislation. That poll was taken in my riding.
It has been difficult to get a good grasp on what the majority of constituents think on this issue. What I did was call around. In fact, I talked to some of the gun control opponents in my riding. They said that they had been taking polls too. It showed 70:30. The numbers were not only true but they were stronger.
It makes it difficult for all hon. members. I know tonight as we vote on this Reform Party members will too be looking at how their constituents think about this issue. On this issue we are talking about a five-year review, which I totally support and which I have put forward. The minister is here today and he has indicated in the past that this might be a proper thing to do, to review the legislation to make sure it is working.
The Toronto Globe and Mail had an editorial which essentially said the same thing. Let us see whether or not the registration of guns will do what the government says it will do. That is why I support the motions. I would put the year for review at 2008 as the hon. parliament secretary has done. That would be a good way to do it.
Since the parliamentary secretary said he supported the idea and the minister is here and since the Reform Party agrees with this, I wonder if we could get unanimous consent to put forward a motion that would use the year 2008, five years after the implementation. If there is unanimous consent, the motion would say:
That Bill C-68 be amended by adding after line 28 on page 134 the following:
That no later than January 1, 2008, that the federal minister shall prepare a report on the effectiveness of this act in reducing the incidents of indictable offences involving the use of a firearm, and lay the report before the House of Commons.
I wonder if we could get unanimous consent of the House for this motion?
Firearms Act June 12th, 1995
Mr. Speaker, this is a very important issue for many people in the rural areas of the country.
I have considered this question over the last several years. In my previous life as an opposition member we had a debate on this issue. In fact we have debated the matter a number of times. I was here when Bill C-17 was debated, which was brought in by the former Conservative government.
That bill was supported by the hon. member for Kamloops who stood in the House today to say that he was upset with the fact that time allocation had been imposed. During the previous debate that member was the House leader of the New Democratic Party and he supported the government, in fact all the parties, in limiting debate and supported not having a vote at second reading. I find it somewhat surprising today that the hon. member for Kamloops would stand in his place and criticize the government for imposing time allocation.
We have debated this bill for the last year. I am sure all hon. members in the House have had or should have had the opportunity to express the views of their constituents, not only on the floor of the House but across the country. Certainly in the last year there have been opportunities for constituents to express their views of the issue. I have travelled across my riding. I have been to gun rallies. I have met with different groups.
This past weekend as I debated how I will vote on the issue I had the opportunity to speak with many of my constituents, especially a number of the mayors and regional councillors. In my constituency a number of motions were put forward by regional councils and a number of municipalities outlining their concerns with the legislation. I have also had an opportunity to speak to a lot of my gun guys. I call them the gun guys because they are the ones who have formed different shooting clubs.
They are members of anglers and hunters groups and they have come together to fight the bill. I say gun guys because the membership is made up of guys. I have been out west and I have discussed this issue with people in various ridings.
I took issue with the hon. member for Yorkton-Melville when he talked about the view of Ontarians on the issue. He seemed to suggest that somehow the Mike Harris sweep meant that people were against gun control in Ontario. That is simply not true. Take the example of northern Ontario for instance where there is the strongest disagreement with this bill. It went Liberal and NDP. In two of the three ridings of the members of this party that voted against the government on second reading, those ridings went Liberal.
Therefore, I find it hard to believe that the Reform Party, as it does in my riding, tries to take credit somehow for the Mike Harris victory in this past election. As members know, that is simply not true.
I have had difficulties on this issue in my own riding simply because I have had the opportunity of getting around and talking to a number of people. If one talks to people generally on the street, what they will say is that a lot of people are against this legislation.
The Reform Party in my riding likes to build this up. The Reform Party comes forward. Its past candidate writes letters to an editor at a newspaper saying they will use this and fight the member on it.
Most people in my riding know my views on this issue. They know that I fought hard to make changes. What they do not know is how the Reform Party says it is speaking out on behalf of its constituents but when you look at the numbers and the polls, it shows that many of these members are being two faced about the issue. They are claiming to represent their constituents and they are not.
There are only a few brave members of the Reform Party who are standing up for what their constituents want. I find that to be in contrast with what the Reform Party promised in the last election. I have always in the House taken very strongly the views of my constituents and tried to put them forward.
What the Reform Party never tells you when its members talk about free votes-we have not seen very many free votes from these people-is what you do in the House when-
Supply April 27th, 1995
Do you want a three tier system?
Interparliamentary Delegations April 27th, 1995
Madam Speaker, pursuant to Standing Order 34 I have the honour to present to the House a report from the Canadian branch of the Commonwealth Parliamentary Association concerning our visit to Hong Kong from March 13 to 17, 1995.
Canadian Police Information Centre April 6th, 1995
Mr. Speaker, it is estimated that 42,000 Canadian children are sexually abused annually. Last November the Minister of Justice and the Solicitor General announced changes to the Canadian Police Information Centre.
I commend the ministers for their positive improvements. Unfortunately, even though the database is available, there is no obligation to access it. At the moment the process is cumbersome.
Another serious problem is the granting of pardons for those convicted of sex offences against children. Tens of thousands of Canadians have signed petitions and letters asking for additional laws to protect our children. Many of these will be presented today after question period by Monica Rainey, founder and executive director of the Citizens Against Child Exploitation.
In light of the urgent plight of Canadian children, I urge the Minister of Justice to implement a mandatory certificate of clearance system and immediately investigate the option of amending the Criminal Records Act to prohibit pardons for those convicted of sex offences involving children under the age of 18.