Jesse Flis

[Young Offenders Act, June 6th, 1994]

Mr. Speaker, I am glad the hon. member sits so close to the Reform members and I wish they would turn around sometimes and seek his advice because he has been here for a long time and knows what the democratic process is all about.

Initially I paid very little attention to it because I thought it was just surveying the members of Parliament. When I saw the line "you need your parents' consent to incur these charges if you are younger than 18", I was a little offended because I only have one parent left. My mother is 86 and I do not know whether she would give her consent to vote this way.

I suspect that this letter was sent to the public and it was concerned that someone under 18 would not pay the Reform for that one dollar call, and 95 cents thereafter. That was my concern.

That anyone should charge to glean people's opinion, people who voted for us, my goodness, is the hon. member not getting a high enough salary? Is that why he is putting a charge on this? Is he waiting for his pension or is he afraid he is not going to get a pension because he will not be here very long?

I have a concern that this letter went not only to the members of Parliament, but I suspect that this letter probably went to the public at large.

[Young Offenders Act, June 6th, 1994]

Mr. Speaker, I thank the hon. member for that question. We are not doing anything behind closed doors. We are bringing it here to the Parliament of Canada. Why do we have to hold secret votes through PIN numbers? Is this not where we are going to vote? Is this not where the member is going to represent his constituents? Does he not keep in touch with his constituents?

What about the poor people, what about the people who still have dial phones? They cannot phone their local member of Parliament. What is wrong with talking with them face to face, with holding town hall meetings, telephoning them, et cetera?

I am glad the hon. member raised this concern but this is where we vote, not through 1-900 numbers.

What about the poor people? Do they not have rights to input to their MPs? It looks like in the Reform territory it is only for the rich, it is only who can afford the push button numbers.

[Young Offenders Act, June 6th, 1994]

Mr. Speaker, I am very pleased to participate in this debate.

As a member of Parliament from metropolitan Toronto I can assure members that many people in my riding of Parkdale-High Park do not feel safe in their neighbourhoods any more. Seniors are afraid. Women live in fear. They are afraid to come out to town hall meetings in the evenings. Even some of the schoolyards appear to be dangerous places for the children. Parents complain that they are finding syringes in the sandboxes

and are afraid their children could get pricked with those and get AIDS, et cetera.

That is why I welcome tougher legislation to make the Young Offenders Act more effective. Acting on a promise from the Liberal election platform of October 26, 1993 the Liberal government is cracking down on serious youth crime and making the protection of society our first priority.

In the chapter entitled "Safe Homes and Safe Streets", the Liberals promised to double the maximum sentence from five years to 10 years for first degree murder. Bill C-37 makes good on our election promise and our commitment to Canadians.

Let us look at parole for young offenders convicted of murder. No longer will they be automatically eligible for parole after serving only five years of their sentence. This is a firm measure to ensure that the protection of society comes first.

Of course there are many critics of this legislation as we have heard in this debate already today. Some say the government has not gone far enough, that we should simply lock up the young people who commit serious crimes and throw away the key. If the solution were that simple, we would have legislated crime out of existence long ago.

Let us look at the United States, the country with the highest incarceration rate of all the developed nations, yet longer sentences and stricter penalties are not enough to prevent crimes. Canada follows the United States with the second highest incarceration rate. It is higher than Japan, higher than France, Italy, the United Kingdom and even Turkey, but still we have not eliminated crime.

It is quite clear that deterrence is not enough. Government recognizes that the justice system can only deal with young offenders after a crime has been committed, but once a young offender commits a crime, it is too late. The real solution lies in crime prevention.

In my own riding of Parkdale-High Park, residents in Parkdale have banded together to form the Parkdale focus community watch. This highly innovative group works closely with police and public authorities to have an impact on critical decisions which affect the community. They liaise with the liquor licensing board, the police, business associations, ratepayer groups, anyone who is interested in the community to network with this group.

Community watch will do things such as safety audits in the community. A subcommittee will do a safety audit. They might see that a telephone booth is in a dark area where the drug trade is going on. There might be a lot of prostitution in that corner, a lot of fights break out, et cetera. They report back to the full committee. A phone call goes to Bell and negotiations start. That phone booth is either removed or lighting is intensified. The city is co-operating; the lighting along Queen Street has been intensified again to help prevent crime.

Recently the Minister of Justice paid a visit to Parkdale and met with this community watch. Its members were very impressed with the way the minister is communicating and dialoguing with the local communities. They were impressed that the minister offered to come back to see how they were doing with this community model of crime prevention. This was a unique opportunity for concerned residents to have a voice and affect justice reform. The Parkdale focus community watch could easily serve as a model for other communities, a shining example that we all have a stake in crime prevention.

Crime prevention has to begin at home. As a former teacher, principal and co-ordinator working with disadvantaged children, I believe that is where we should place a lot of our resources: helping parents to give them parenting techniques so that children from day one are not led down the road to crime.

In the school system, I grew up in a school system and I administered schools with 1,500 students and schools with 300 students. We used corporal punishment. I had no discipline problems. The schools ran very well, but we resorted to corporal punishment. I doubt whether in 1994 we should have to resort to that kind of corporal punishment. I think we do have to make a school policy of zero crime tolerance, as many schools are doing today.

I congratulate the minister and I support the bill 100 per cent. However I am very concerned with what is happening in our Parliament. I received a letter just the other day which states: "Dear Mr. Flis: Every member of Parliament is being provided with a secret PIN number and asked to call 1-900-451-4020 to vote in referendum 94 on the Young Offenders Act. If the majority position in the referendum indicates a need to change the Young Offenders Act, Ted White will draft a private member's bill for introduction to Parliament". Then it states to call that same number but $1 will be charged for the first minute and 95 cents for each additional minute will be billed if you stay on the line after the beep. It states that you need your parents' consent to incur these charges if you are not over 18. I want to assure him I am over 18 and I do not need my parents' consent to call him.

I do not have time to quote further from the letter. However it shocks me that a member of the Reform Party who was elected freely in a democratic election would resort to the use of secret PIN numbers to give us direction on what should be in the Young Offenders Act. Who gave that member the right to give me a secret PIN number? It is not secret; I will give it to the public: 669746562211. That is my secret PIN number. You, Mr. Speaker, have a secret PIN number too and you are probably on the

1-900 number which is used for getting sex into the homes and all other advertising over the phone lines.

It shocks me. We are having a serious debate on the young offenders bill which most people have asked for and the government has brought in and the Reform Party resorts to this kind of trash. I hope the Reform Party will learn that we do not do things secretly. And you have to have a touch tone phone. What about all those Canadians who cannot afford that service? Are they denied the right to have input to their member of Parliament?

The Liberal Party is very open and transparent. When we want to put something into legislation, we put it in and debate it openly in this House.

I hope the Reform Party will not resort to those kinds of tactics. They have been used in many countries, but I hope they will not be used in Canada.

[Canadian International Development Agency, May 27th, 1994]

Mr. Speaker, I do not know how more authoritarian one can make an accountability than through Parliament which is elected by the people of Canada. That is the ultimate accountability.

I welcome the hon. member's intervention. He and I are on the foreign affairs committee and, as he knows, we are doing an in depth foreign policy review. I hope he will raise that in committee again-he has already-so that the committee can take that under consideration when it is making its report to the government.

[Canadian International Development Agency, May 27th, 1994]

Mr. Speaker, I thank the hon. member for that question.

As I mentioned yesterday, although maybe I did not make it too clear, CIDA is responsible to Parliament and very accountable through the annual estimates. The committee on foreign affairs and international trade can call the appropriate ministers before it. We can question the ministers and the bureaucracy of CIDA through the estimates.

I mentioned yesterday that the Auditor General's office did audit three CIDA projects in three Asian countries. It chose three countries because it thought they would reflect the rest of the countries.

In its report it had some severe criticisms of CIDA, et cetera, but what I want to stress is when the Auditor General and the director of CIDA appeared before the accounts committee and the foreign affairs committee, the Auditor General praised CIDA for how quickly it acted to the recommendations of the Auditor General.

[Empress Of Ireland, May 27th, 1994]

Mr. Speaker, this Sunday marks the 80th anniversary of the tragic sinking of the Empress of Ireland , Canada's little known version of the Titanic disaster which still ranks as the worst maritime accident in Canadian history. On May 29, 1914 the Empress of Ireland was en route from Quebec City when she ran into thick fog and collided with another ship at the mouth of the St. Lawrence River.

Over 1,000 passengers and crew suddenly lost their lives as the ship went down in less than 14 minutes. Many more would have perished in the icy waters if not for the heroic efforts of the ship's surgeon, Dr. James Grant. In the absence of medical supplies or proper facilities, Dr. Grant treated his fellow survivors and restored calm in the midst of the crisis.

Let us not overlook this important event in Canadian history. May we remember all those aboard the Empress of Ireland .

[Canadian International Development Agency, May 26th, 1994]

Mr. Speaker, I will pass the hon. member's question on to the minister. Again the hon. member knows the forum to which to take such a recommendation.

I would not agree with the hon. member when he says that CIDA is not accountable to Parliament. The Auditor General just did an in depth audit of CIDA programs, specifically in three Asian countries. He gave CIDA a glowing report.

There is accountability. No one more than the workers in CIDA are conscious of getting the best for the Canadian tax dollar. They know how hard it is to collect that dollar and they spend that dollar very wisely. They look at their objectives and the programs that would meet those objectives. The hon. member must know that before a program is implemented the local provincial governments are consulted, as are the NGO people.

[Canadian International Development Agency, May 26th, 1994]

Mr. Speaker, CIDA has a very clear mandate, one of sustainable development in developing countries.

The hon. member knows very well because he was at the meeting this morning. The Canadian Council for International Co-Operation appeared before the joint committee on foreign policy and it praised CIDA for providing a very enviable reputation in many countries where it is doing work.

The hon. member also knows we are now going through an in depth review of foreign policy, including foreign aid, defence and other issues. Any recommendations the member has should be made to the joint committee on foreign affairs which may consider some of his recommendations. However it would have to be an agreement of the foreign affairs standing committee.

[Missing Children's Day, May 25th, 1994]

Mr. Speaker, I wish to add my words to those of the member for St. Boniface. Each year in Canada police receive thousands of reports of missing children who are classified as runaways, abductions by strangers, or parental abductions.

Too frequently these children are extremely vulnerable to violence and exploitation on the streets. In the greater Toronto area Operation Go Home is just one of thousands of organizations dedicated to making Canadian communities a safe environment for our children.

Since 1984, May 25 has been recognized in Canada as National Missing Children's Day. This is an opportune time during the International Year of the Family to renew our commitment to crime prevention and to safer homes and streets for our children.

I invite all Canadians to join us in recognizing this day by wearing a green ribbon of hope.

[International Day Of Families, May 12th, 1994]

Mr. Speaker, the United Nations recently decided that beginning in 1994, May 15 of each year shall be observed as the International Day of Families.

In spite of the hectic pace of the 1990s, the importance of family must not be taken for granted nor underestimated. It is the family unit which passes on culture and tradition from one generation to another. It is the family which provides the primary source of caring and nurturing for our children. Indeed our future survival depends on the family.

The Canada Committee for the International Year of the Family feels that we must support our families in order to maintain a compassionate, productive and tolerant society.

We must resist the forces that threaten to tear our families apart. Instead we must embrace the family ties that make Canada a strong nation.

This Sunday it is worth reminding ourselves that despite all our differences we have family ties that bind us locally, nationally and globally.