David Sweet

[Firearms Act, June 19th, 2018]

Mr. Speaker, of course, I have a profound amount of concern in regard to everything the member said, not the least of which is this is simply another layer of red tape that is going to be another cost to taxpayers. It is information that is already available. I have already mentioned, and the parliamentary secretary agreed, that retailers already now make sure that every sale is recorded in their own store. A law enforcement officer can go into those stores and check it. This is simply another way to add red tape and make it more difficult for the average Canadian to comply with these laws.

I would also like to point out that the other thing the bill does not address are victims of violent crime. Concern for victims by the Liberal Party has been totally absent in this session. In fact, the victim ombudsman's office has been vacant for months, and the Liberals have not even had the courtesy to make sure there is a victim ombudsperson there to deal with the concerns of families who have been victimized in Canada.

[Firearms Act, June 19th, 2018]

Mr. Speaker, I am glad to answer my colleague from Kingston, which is my hometown. It is a nice place. Too bad it is represented by a Liberal.

The fact that the word “registrar” is in the bill indicates, as I mentioned, that there must be something that the registrar is responsible for, and that must be a registry.

To do a bait and switch like the member is suggesting, in order words, to accept one of the amendments that my colleague suggested but dismiss four of the others to assure that there was not any registry, is exactly the case that we are talking about here.

Earlier today, the public safety minister mentioned a guns and gangs summit that happened here in Ottawa. I do not see anything that would be a product of that summit that happened here enshrined in the bill. I do not see anything giving resources to law enforcement. I do not see anything providing new regulations in order for them to investigate the importation of illegal guns.

As the parliamentary secretary mentioned earlier, we cannot possibly make something illegal that is already illegal. Well, we can certainly draft legislation that would help with enforcement of the importation of illegal firearms.

[Firearms Act, June 19th, 2018]

Mr. Speaker, it is an honour to rise in the House today to speak to Bill C-71, an act to amend certain acts and regulations in relation to firearms.

I have been a member of this place for nearly 13 years. I am proud that over that time I have played a part in legislation that ensures Parliament is reaching three important objectives: first, that laws are put in place to protect the public from violent crime; second, that we are standing up for victims of crime and their families; and third, that law-abiding Canadians are treated with respect.

In this case, Bill C-71 misses the mark on all three of these objectives.

I recognize, and indeed our previous Conservative government recognized, how important it is to ensure that violent offenders and those who intend on using weapons to commit crimes are taken off the streets. I am certainly an advocate for legislation that targets dangerous offenders, protects our public, and ensures justice for victims and their families. I am proud that over my time here, I have been able to do my part to do just that.

In 2013, I introduced Bill C-479, an act to bring fairness for the victims of violent offenders. This legislation, which received all-party support, made certain that violent offenders who were clearly not remorseful or ready to be reintegrated into society could not drag their victims and their families before the Parole Board every year needlessly.

Indeed, any laws that aim to tackle violent crime must also seek to protect victims of violent offenders and their families from being re-victimized. They must also ensure that these offenders, those that are among the most likely to reoffend, do not get that opportunity.

By introducing legislation such as the Common Sense Firearms Licensing Act, the Safe Streets and Communities Act, and the Tackling Violent Crime Act, among many others, our Conservative government implemented productive, common-sense policies that treated firearms owners in the manner that any law-abiding citizen should be treated, while also cracking down on violent offenders and protecting the rights of victims.

The Common Sense Firearms Licensing Act took the power to reclassify firearms out of the hands of the RCMP and officials and put it in the hands of parliamentarians, who could be held accountable by the public. In doing so, our government sought to prevent any law-abiding citizen from being criminalized due to an unsubstantiated classification change.

The Tackling Violent Crime Act mandated jail time for serious gun crimes and made bail provisions stricter for those who had been accused of such crimes.

The Organized Crime and Protection of Justice System Participants Act provided police and justices with crucial new tools to fight against organized crime and to target reckless shootings by adding a new offence for the use of a firearm in the commission of a crime, regardless of whether the person caused or meant to cause bodily harm.

Of course, who could forget that we repealed the wasteful and ineffective long gun registry, which did absolutely nothing to reduce crime, but did waste millions in taxpayer dollars to treat law-abiding Canadians like criminals. In fact, I would challenge my Liberal colleagues to show me any data that would prove that there has been any increase in firearms crimes from legal firearms owners since the firearms registry was eliminated.

These are just a very small sample of the measures our previous Conservative government took to protect our communities and keep Canadians safe.

It is a shame now that the current Liberal government is trying to undo the progress we made. We have seen over the past two and a half years that the government cannot be trusted when it comes to protecting the public, while also protecting the rights of farmers and recreational and competitive firearms owners.

Bill C-71 proposes a myriad of changes that would potentially criminalize law-abiding Canadians, while doing nothing to target violent offenders or organized crime. The bill would put firearms classification powers back in the hands of unelected officials who Canadians cannot hold accountable, and risks unsubstantiated changes that would indeed create legal problems for people who have done nothing wrong. For my colleagues across the way, we experienced that in the last session when changes were made. Some members of Parliament who possessed firearms were criminalized by the changes.

What is worse is that the Liberals are pretending they are not trying to bring back the long-gun registry, which is nothing less than misleading. This bill would create a registrar to keep track of transfers of non-restricted firearms, yet the government insists it is not bringing back the long-gun registry.

I took the liberty of doing a quick Google search for the word “registrar”, and right at the top of the page was a definition that read, “an official responsible for keeping a register or official records.” That certainly sounds like a long-gun registry to me, and it sounds equally as wasteful and ineffective as the last one.

Originally, our caucus was optimistic about the government's intentions when it accepted our amendment at committee, which stated, “For greater certainty, nothing in this Act shall be construed so as to permit or require the registration of non-restricted firearms.” However, much to our surprise, it rejected our additional amendments that would have ensured that the elements of Bill C-71 to bring in this new long-gun registry were taken out of the bill. The government can say that it is not bringing back the long-gun registry, and I have heard it say that many times, but that does not make it true.

Meanwhile, Bill C-75, the government's legislation that proposes to overhaul the Criminal Code, would reduce penalties for very serious crimes, in some cases down to simple fines. The penalties for crimes like participating in the activities of a terrorist group, advocating genocide, and participating in organized criminal activity are being reduced in one piece of legislation, while farmers are being potentially criminalized in another. That is absolutely shameful.

The riding I represent, Flamborough—Glanbrook, is home to many farmers, hunters and sport shooters. These are people who are legally and safely using their firearms to protect their livestock and their crops, and who are participating in recreational pastimes that are ingrained in our national heritage.

I have heard from a wide variety of firearms owners in my riding who are deeply concerned that the government is targeting them through this bill, while completely neglecting to address rising crime rates in rural communities across the country which are particularly derived from illegal imported firearms.

I personally enjoy going down to the range for recreational purposes, and I completely understand the concerns of my constituents. They are concerned that they could be randomly criminalized by bureaucrats who they would be wholly unable to hold to account. They are concerned that the government is increasing red tape and treating them like criminals when they have done absolutely nothing wrong.

As has already been pointed out by our Conservative caucus several times throughout debate on this bill, this new long-gun registry that the Liberals are bringing in through the back door is treating law-abiding Canadians like suspects, and that is just not right.

The tandem of Bill C-71 and Bill C-75 is symbolic of much of the last two and a half years, where the government has been terribly ineffective on numerous files. The Liberals introduced these two pieces of legislation with the notion that they wished to tackle gun violence. However, they are doing nothing of the sort. What these bills would do is potentially criminalize law-abiding farmers, hunters, and sport shooters, and reduce the penalties for very serious and violent crimes. What they would not do is make our communities safer.

Canadians want to feel safe in their communities and their homes. They want a government that ensures that those who pose a threat to them and their families are taken off the streets. Bill C-71, and Bill C-75 for that matter, would do nothing of the sort.

This legislation is not only deeply flawed, but wasteful, and quite frankly offensive to the thousands of law-abiding Canadians who it will affect. Our Conservative caucus is determined to ensure that the laws we produce in this place protect our communities and respect the rights of law-abiding Canadians. Anything less is not good enough.

[Firearms Act, June 19th, 2018]

Mr. Speaker, the parliamentary secretary implied that retailers do not keep records of firearms they sell. That is categorically wrong. All the retailers I know of keep those records, and so that is a misnomer in and of itself.

This legislation would not combat the number one problem we have as far as crimes and firearms are concerned, and that is illegal firearms. It is illegal guns that are smuggled in, primarily from the United States. There is no mention of that whatsoever. In fact, this is what I would call lackadaisical legislation in the sense that farmers, sports shooters, and competitive shooters are the most law-abiding people I know. This is simply laying over more red tape on top of people who are already obeying the laws. Could the parliamentary secretary explain how that would substantially reduce firearms violence in Canada?

[Petitions, June 19th, 2018]

Mr. Speaker, I have a petition regarding human organ trafficking. In light of a continued global market for illegally harvested human organs, the petitioners are asking that Parliament and the Government of Canada move quickly to ensure that Bill C-350, which is before this House, and Bill S-240, which is in the other place, are passed, and that Canada does its share to combat organ harvesting and trafficking.

[Questions Passed as Orders for Returns, June 18th, 2018]

With regard to unescorted temporary absences for inmates in Correctional Service of Canada institutions, since November 4, 2015: (a) how many individuals serving an indeterminate sentence have been granted unescorted temporary absences; (b) for those individuals referred to in (a), what are the index offences for each individual who was granted an unescorted temporary absence; (c) for those individuals referred to in (a), what was the purpose and duration of each unescorted temporary absence; (d) for those individuals referred to in (a), how many individuals became unlawfully at large during the period of their unescorted temporary absence; (e) how many individuals serving life sentences have been granted unescorted temporary absences; (f) for those individuals referred to in (e), what are the index offences for each individual who was granted an unescorted temporary absence; (g) for those individuals referred to in (e), what was the purpose and duration of each unescorted temporary absence; (h) for those individuals referred to in (e), how many individuals became unlawfully at large during the period of their unescorted temporary absence; (i) how many individuals serving a sentence of 25 years or more have been granted unescorted temporary absences; (j) for those individuals referred to in (i), what are the index offences for each individual who was granted an unescorted temporary absence; (k) for those individuals referred to in (i), what was the purpose and duration of each unescorted temporary absence; (l) for those individuals referred to in (i), how many individuals became unlawfully at large during the period of their unescorted temporary absence; (m) how many individuals serving a sentence of ten years or more have been granted unescorted temporary absences; (n) for those individuals referred to in (m), what are the index offences for each individual who was granted an unescorted temporary absence; (o) for those individuals referred to in (m), what was the purpose and duration of each unescorted temporary absence; and (p) for those individuals referred to in (m), how many individuals became unlawfully at large during the period of their unescorted temporary absence?

[Points of Order, June 14th, 2018]

Mr. Speaker, with the greatest of respect, I was wondering if I could ask you to review the tapes.

Earlier, the member for Vancouver Kingsway made a comment that was general to the Liberal bench, and you called him out for that. Just previous to that, the member for Fredericton made a very egregious remark, not through you, Mr. Speaker, but directly to the member for Thornhill. I feel if one is worthy of being called out, the other one should be as well.

With all due respect, Mr. Speaker, I wonder if you could review the video and peruse your decision there.

[Latin American Heritage Month Act, June 13th, 2018]

Mr. Speaker, it is an honour to rise today in support of Bill S-218 and the establishment of a Latin American heritage month here in Canada.

I would be remiss if I did not begin by acknowledging the late Senator Enverga, who passed away last November. Senator Enverga, of course, was an immigrant to Canada from the Philippines, and was the first Filipino Canadian to be appointed to the Senate. He was a great parliamentarian and a passionate advocate and voice for Latin Americans here in Canada. He is sorely missed by everyone who had the opportunity to work with him.

This bill seeks to establish October of every year as Latin American heritage month in recognition of the substantial contributions that the Latin American community has made to the social, economic, and political fabric of our country. It seeks to recognize great Canadians like Dr. Ivar Mendez, a world renowned neurosurgeon whose research on Parkinson's Disease, and the use of remote presence robots for medical care in neurosurgery, has earned him international acclaim. Dr. Mendez is also an active humanitarian, having established neurosurgical units in several developing countries, and having founded the Ivar Mendez International Foundation, which provides health and educational assistance for students in Bolivia. He is a recipient of the Canadian Red Cross Humanitarian of the Year Award and the Queen Elizabeth II Diamond Jubilee Medal.

Alberto Guerrero is another Latin American who comes to mind, a great Chilean Canadian pianist who influenced several generations of Canadian musicians and who was widely considered one of, if not the pre-eminent music teacher in Canada, having taught historic musicians like Glenn Gould. His influence can be felt throughout Canadian music to this day. Mr. Guerrero is just one member of the Latin American Canadian community who has contributed to a rich Canadian literature and arts scene.

This community has also had a great impact on our national culture through sport. There are countless Latin American Canadian athletes, and I believe my colleague will name a number of them, in soccer, hockey, baseball, football, and other sports, who have made great contributions to Canadian culture. They are not only athletes, but they serve as role models for so many young Canadians from coast to coast to coast.

These are just some examples of the many individuals that Latin American heritage month will allow us to recognize and celebrate.

Equally as important is the fact that this bill allows us to celebrate the success of so many Latin American Canadians and the triumphs they have made despite such long odds, with many having come to Canada in search of a better life or fleeing poor conditions and human rights violations in their home countries.

Throughout the 42nd Parliament, the Subcommittee on International Human Rights has studied the human rights situation in Latin America on multiple occasions. In May of 2016, the subcommittee heard a delegation from the Venezuelan National Assembly, and the picture they painted was quite grim.

The Maduro regime has actively sought to delegitimize elected members of the National Assembly, and has issued prison sentences against assembly members to further its anti-democratic agenda. The average Venezuelan faces a severe lack of access to food and to medicine, with citizens only able to find two of 10 food staples and one in 10 medicines. The delegation highlighted that over the period from 2014 to 2016, poverty was projected to jump from 48% to above 80%.

In 2017, we received an update on the situation by Lilian Tintori, a Venezuelan democracy advocate and the wife of imprisoned opposition leader Leopoldo López, who was joined by the hon. Irwin Cotler, former Minister of Justice. They provided testimony on the deteriorating situation in Venezuela. The situation from the previous year had gotten even worse, with more prisoners of conscience being denied their very basic human rights, and the democratic process being undermined by a tyrannical regime reinforced by its stacked supreme court. These awful conditions have only gotten worse since then.

This heritage motion will help us to remember and advocate for all of those Venezuelans seeking the justice, democracy, and human rights that we enjoy.

In June 2016, we heard testimony concerning the situation in Honduras, where human rights are regularly challenged by insecurity and impunity. Officials from Global Affairs Canada briefed the subcommittee on issues of mass violence and corruption, particularly targeted at human rights defenders and activists.

Berta Cáceres and Nelson Garcia, indigenous human rights defenders, were both gunned down in separate incidents in March 2016. These murders provoked international responses, with our own government condemning the murders and urging the Honduran authorities to ensure justice.

As long as these challenges to human rights protections and law and order exist, long-term development is impossible, and the most vulnerable groups, namely women, children, and indigenous peoples, will continue to struggle. This heritage month bill will remind us of the Hondurans seeking the promise of peace, order, and good government that we enjoy.

The subcommittee also received an update in June 2017 on the situation in Guatemala from Luis García Monroy, the co-founder of Youth Organized in the Defense of Life. Mr. García Monroy told the committee that government corruption and acts of impunity have led to legal, physical, and political attacks on human rights activists. He told us that Guatemalan government forces forcibly displaced families and criminalized human rights defenders. These crimes are totally unacceptable under international human rights law and what is expected of a government with respect to protecting the rights of its citizens.

The countries and situations that I have just highlighted are only a few of the difficult situations in Latin America, the ones that our subcommittee has been able to study. While we have not had the opportunity to study the poor conditions facing people in Cuba, or in many regions of Mexico, this gives some context to just how much adversity so many have to overcome. In this light, thousands have come to Canada from Venezuela, Honduras, Guatemala, and numerous other countries across Latin America in search of a better life for themselves and their families.

Throughout our history, Canada has welcomed these thousands of migrants and refugees who have since become part of the very fabric of our communities across the country. Many of these fine Canadians are truly unsung heroes who contribute to our community on a daily basis. They are small business owners, volunteers, activists, and public servants. They have achieved so much and helped us build a better country despite the long odds and suffering that they may have faced in their birth countries. It is through these individuals and others that we have developed such a strong, multicultural society here in Canada. It is through celebrating these communities that we can continue to embrace that multicultural identity that we as Canadians enjoy and are so proud of.

This bill can also help to grow our relationship with these communities and celebrate the positive influence that Canada can have abroad. I highlight the positive influence on these countries that Canada can achieve, not just in accepting migrants but also in diplomacy, because diligent diplomacy can improve the human rights situation in developing countries. There is a perfect example from the previous Conservative government under Prime Minister Harper, which negotiated a free trade agreement with Colombia. Since then, Colombia is one of the only countries in the region where the human rights situation has gotten better.

This Latin American heritage month bill would only further grow these ties between Canada and Latin American communities, and hopefully spur positive relations and human rights development between our country and those in the Latin American region.

I will conclude by once again acknowledging the late Senator Enverga and thanking him for his dedication to Canada and his passion to serve. Latin American heritage month will truly be a lasting symbol of his legacy. May God bless Senator Enverga's family. May God bless Canada. May God bless Latin America.

[Business of Supply, June 11th, 2018]

Mr. Speaker, I have more of a comment.

The Iranian regime of Ayatollah Khamenei is an extraordinarily tyrannical regime that is matchless in the world. Therefore, I would defend everything the member said by explaining that for the last 13 years, the Subcommittee on International Human Rights has never had more cases of human rights violations as we have had from Iran. In fact, we have Iran accountability week, which derived from our committee for that very reason.

This is a regime that kills its own citizens. It targets Baha'is, Ismailis, or anybody who has anything to say against the regime. It has a very intricate structure of terror as well, from people like those in the Basij, who are on the ground terrorizing people when they are protesting, and will use knives to cut ligaments in their legs, etc., to make sure they demoralize the crowd. The Revolutionary Guard Corps very handily exports terror, and grafts money from its citizens and exports it out of the country as well. We have a lot of evidence on that. I could go on and on.

However, the government often talks about our reputation on the world stage. By normalizing relations with a regime like Iran, it can do nothing but harm our reputation on the world stage. I defend my colleague's speech on making sure that does not happen.

[Carbon Pricing, June 11th, 2018]

Mr. Speaker, last Thursday, Ontarians roundly rejected the Liberals' higher taxes and irresponsible spending of the Liberal government. They rejected years of Liberal mismanagement and scandal. Most of all, they rejected the Liberal carbon tax.

Last week the voters in this province spoke loudly and clearly. When will the Prime Minister start listening and stop forcing his destructive carbon tax on Canadians?