Jean Augustine

[Petitions, June 21st, 1994]

Mr. Speaker, under Standing Order 36, I want to present a petition from a number of people in my riding calling on this House not to amend the human rights code.

[Supply, June 7th, 1994]

Madam Speaker, I spoke about the frustration of Canadians on a daily basis as they listen to, as the member said, the only mandate of the Bloc, which is to separate.

We are here to build a nation. We are here to respond to the economic needs before us. We are here to ensure that our societies and communities function. We are here to provide for all people the kind of society in which our children will find jobs and opportunities to grow and develop.

The constant back and forth of members across the way talking about separation, because that is their mandate, is what I am talking about in terms of frustration. We are frustrated with this. Canadians are frustrated with this discussion.

[Supply, June 7th, 1994]

Madam Speaker, I am pleased to respond because the question is who we are as Canadians, the fact that we support a federal state, the fact that we all need to work together. What happens in the House is really not Canadians on all sides of the issue working together to bring about economic strength, to work for that sense of equity, to work for all those things that become part of the nation and the nation building activities that should be occurring.

We spend a lot of time on discussion about who we are and examining it instead of taking about who we are and starting from there. We throw in all the issues about what are provincial and federal rights, the Constitution, and many of the issues that get rolled around, instead of focusing on who we are as Canadians, what we want of our nation and how together we can work to ensure that we have a nation and respond to the community and to the faces of Canada. I think that is the important question.

[Supply, June 7th, 1994]

Mr. Speaker, yesterday Canada along with other western nations remembered the sacrifices young men and women made on behalf of world peace and freedom. Their courage enabled Canada to emerge as a world leader. We pumped our chests with pride yesterday as we listened to our Prime Minister. We watched our Governor General and the men and women who went over to Europe. They remembered fallen comrades and spoke so well on our behalf. They reached out to the general assembled gathering and took the congratulations that were offered.

Many Canadians felt that sense of pride. Many Canadians felt that they wanted the country we call Canada maintained, this place which is our home, which many of us who came after the post-war era chose as home.

Canada has created jobs and opportunities. I stand here as someone who selected this country, who came with a sense of pride and was received and welcomed by Canadians. I was told that with my talents and skills there were opportunities to develop, to grow and to be very much part of the building of Canadian society.

In our large urban areas, a large percentage of the residents were not born in this country. Like myself, they came and have created a dynamic community, a community which is a model for the rest of the world, a cosmopolitan world. We are now a diverse, multicultural, multiracial, multilingual, multiethnic and multireligious society. We are the envy of the world. Canada is rated as the best country in the world in which to live. Changes have occurred but the Leader of the Opposition would have us believe that Canada still remains as two solitudes. Canadians are growing frustrated by the constant belittlement of the country.

I would like to share with members a fax which I have received. It is one of many, but is especially appropriate for today. It comes from Christa Jacobs in my riding. She wanted to make sure some things were put on the record. She says: "In 1962 I became a citizen of Canada of my own free will. I was elated and proud to be a member of a democratic country consisting of 10 provinces and two territories".

She goes on to say a whole series of things, but I will point out a few. Again I will quote from her letter because she also believes Canadians are growing frustrated by the opposition's constant belittlement of this great nation: "Mr. Bouchard's plans would actually destroy the contract I made with Canada in 1962, since the Canada that would remain should Quebec separate would no longer be the country of which I became a citizen and tax paying member. I wonder how others who became Canadians in the way that I did stand on this issue".

She goes on to talk about the two official languages: "Do not make two official ethnicities. I can speak several different languages. I can speak German, Russian and Italian. I certainly do not feel that speaking a language makes me anything. It is my national affiliation that counts".

I underscore the point that Canadians who watch this House daily are growing frustrated by the constant belittlement of the country. She says: "Mr. Bouchard is acting like the Robespierre of Canadian politics and together with his group of new age Jacobins would purify Canada in some sort of ethnic historical way. Plus ça change, plus c'est la même chose". She goes on to speak about her real frustration and the frustration of Canadians

with the Leader of the Opposition's constant belittlement of the country.

We have evolved into a society which cares, a land which is just and free, peaceful and prosperous. Canadians who care deeply for the country are growing impatient. Many believe they are not respected, not understood and not wanted. We hear these sentiments daily and that sense of frustration grows.

Canada is a model for the rest of the world. Those who created Canada shared the fundamental commitment to freedom, representative democracy and the rule of law. Canadians want the federal government to maintain its powers, to remain strong and to enable the continued efficient functioning of the economic union and national social programs.

There are very few places and very few countries to which I have not travelled. While in South Africa I heard 11 official languages and saw people of different ethnic and cultural groups attempting to work together and talking about unifying, building and establishing the kind of country they model on our country, Canada. I was constantly asked about our democracy and about someone like myself who was not born in this country. Speaking with a Caribbean accent, a person of colour, a black woman, I said to the South Africans: "I am a member of the Canadian legislature", and I felt the sense of pride that in Canada this is possible.

Canadians know we benefit from a number of social programs that reflect our understanding of community. These programs are implemented in a way that permits governments to take into account changing times and changing needs. I am presently working on the modernizing and restructuring of our social security programs. I can say that the constant discussion which takes place with members of the party across the way is not nation building.

In other nations people risk their lives and sacrifice their material security for the very freedoms previous generations have already guaranteed for us. Our sense of freedom is modified by a sense of justice, caring and compassion for all. We must remain committed to ensuring that our country operates and that each and every individual is a part of the national image.

[Young Offenders Act, June 6th, 1994]

Mr. Speaker, at this point I cannot delineate for the member which provinces and which groups provided the specific input for the bill before us. It is important to note that we were attempting to deal with serious crimes, first and second offences, the ability of the judge to decide whether the crime is serious enough or the offence is serious enough to be moved.

[Young Offenders Act, June 6th, 1994]

Mr. Speaker, the changes that are proposed and the changes that have occurred are as a result of the serious consultation which has taken place. We have also looked at the age at which the responsibility of sentencing could be placed on individuals as a result of the kind of crime committed. When the member says they could be transferred at age 14 directly into adult court, I am not sure whether he has missed the part in Bill C-37 which speaks to this consideration. The decision of moving from youth court to adult court is made by the judge.

[Young Offenders Act, June 6th, 1994]

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to lend my voice to the debate on the proposed amendments to the Young Offenders Act. I stand as someone who has worked for over 30 years in the education system, working with young people as a school teacher, as a vice-principal, as a principal and in several capacities as counsellor. I am also a mother of two black Canadian children. I am very concerned about all Canadian youth, including the situation of black youth in the country.

We heard from across the way that the elephant gave birth to a mouse. This is not reality. We are talking about Bill C-37 which is intent on addressing the reality of the situation that faces us today in our communities.

My constituency office in Etobicoke-Lakeshore receives numerous calls on a daily basis: calls for reforms to the act, calls from Canadians concerned about the safety of their families, concerned about their communities, concerned and fearful when they read the daily barrage of media reports and stories that speak about teenage vandalism, random acts of violence, use of weapons, et cetera. Some of the people I have spoken to about the issue tell me that juveniles are laughing at the present system of justice. They want to see reforms to the Young Offenders Act.

Public consultation has indicated a major dissatisfaction with the present treatment of young offenders. The bill is the justice minister's response to Canadians to provide Canadians with immediate action that would particularly address violent crimes.

I will direct my remarks to the situation around the call for action. On June 2, 1994 the justice minister introduced this comprehensive, two-phase set of proposals to amend portions of the 10-year old Young Offenders Act. These proposals reflect an extensive process of consultation and consideration regarding violent young offenders who commit serious crimes. The proposed amendments will improve the act's ability to deal effectively with serious youth crime and improve public protection.

There are several highlights to these proposals: increased sentences for teenagers convicted of first or second degree murder in youth court; dealing with 16 and 17-year-olds charged with serious personal offences in adult court unless they can show a judge otherwise, and we heard the debate a few minutes ago between the Bloc member and the member on this side of the House about the decision of the judge that public protection and rehabilitation can both be achieved through youth court; and extending the time that 16 and 17-year old young offenders who have been convicted of murder in an adult court must serve before they can be considered for parole.

Bill C-37 calls for improved measures for information sharing between professionals such as school officials, police and selected members of the public when public safety is at risk, as well as retaining the records of serious young offenders a little longer and encouraging rehabilitation and treatment of young offenders in the community when appropriate.

Some members of the Chamber will have us believe that these measures are not tough enough. We heard the debate this afternoon. They are seeking harsher penalties for each category of the Young Offenders Act. Some even advocate a hard line approach that would call upon applying the act to offenders as young as 10 years of age. They argue that the public will be better protected from the serious antisocial behaviour of some children if these children were included under the Young Offenders Act.

A federal-provincial committee studied the minimum age issue in 1990 and recommended keeping the age of 12 and strengthening provincial legislation where required. The act covers youth under the age of 18 and was set at 17 because many adult rights and responsibilities, for example voting, alcohol consumption, et cetera, begin at age 18.

However many criminologists have argued that the preventive and rehabilitative strategies available in the youth court system are in the long run more effective at reducing youth crime than strategies which rely mainly on the deterrent factor associated with the adult penal system. In the long run harsher jail sentences, tougher parole laws and bigger prisons will not make our communities any safer from violent youth crime. Quick measures will not provide a long term solution to the issue of young violent offenders.

What should be done and what will be done once the second phase of the government's plan goes into action is to change the conditions that create violence among young people. We must respond to the issue of violence among young people with well thought out strategies to change the root causes of such behaviour.

I know that over the next six to eight months the justice committee will be undertaking a thorough assessment of the Young Offenders Act. We must involve our young people in these discussions, as well as those in the community who are most affected by fear of crime.

We must not create a punitive repressive youth justice system that will target blacks, natives and the poor. The long term solution will call for co-ordination between the community, social services and the justice system to tackle the complex questions surrounding youth crime.

Violence against women and children, poverty, shortage of recreational facilities, lack of opportunities, dysfunctional families, racism are all underlying factors which lead to youth crime. We must all work together toward seeking alternatives.

Prevention of violence and crime will surely be our ultimate goal, not the punitive way in which some members of this House would have us go.

[Petitions, June 6th, 1994]

Mr. Speaker, I present this petition on behalf of a number of constituents in my riding. They are asking that we amend the laws of Canada.

They petition the House of Commons and Parliament assembled to amend the laws of Canada to prohibit the importation, distribution, sale and manufacture of killer cards in law and to advise producers of killer cards that their product if destined for Canada will be seized and destroyed.

[Canada Student Financial Assistance Act, May 24th, 1994]

Mr. Speaker, we are talking about equity in this country. I think that the member across the way should recognize that there are some inequities and there should be some opportunities to ensure that in every institution and every place in our society that women are there in equal numbers and that their skills are recognized.

There are 15,000 male full time teachers in our system compared with 10,000 women. We know that the opportunities are not there for women. This is an opportunity provided for women to find themselves on the same level as men and to

ensure that in all of our teaching facilities there are the same qualifications and an equal balance of sexes in our professions.

It is important that a role model be there. It is important that we give strong messages to our young people that regardless of their sex, opportunities are there for them. This is an opportunity that is being provided at this time for women who would like to continue their studies at the doctoral level to do so.

[Canada Student Financial Assistance Act, May 24th, 1994]

I thank my colleague for his question and also for his concern as to the progress of the work we are presently embarking upon.

I am aware that my colleague knows that we have heard from hundreds of Canadians who have come before our standing committee. My colleague is aware of the situation that faces the young people in this country and that we need to provide them with opportunities for jobs. It is important that our young people at the end of the school year can see where their future is heading in the upcoming year. In the process that is before us there is a tie-in of course with the work and the reform that is going to take place. It is also important to note that we are here to govern, to take the leadership and to ensure that we meet the needs of Canadians especially our young people at this very crucial time of the year and also at this very crucial point in the economic situation that faces our young people.