Garry Breitkreuz

[Supply, March 17th, 1994]

Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank the hon. member for his comments. He explains the Charter of Rights and Freedoms and some of the problems in the charter very well, and also some of the laws that we have on our books.

We have many laws on our books, but the frustration is that people perceive that the courts are not really carrying out the mandate they have been given.

I would like to say too that while we disagree on a lot of things like debt and deficit and so on, if there is one issue we must get together on it is the issue of criminal justice reform and the need for it. We need to be co-operative about this thing, not confrontational.

One of the problems people see is that the courts often hand out very light sentences for very serious crimes. For example, in the southern part of my riding very recently an elderly gentleman was lured out of his home and savagely killed. The main perpetrator of that crime received four years and will be getting out shortly on parole. People find it very unacceptable that this man committed a terrible murder and will be out in a very short time because of extenuating circumstances. But the courts have found him guilty. People find this a real problem. It is not that the laws are not there but it is perceived that many of these people are getting away with murder.

I have a question that people have asked me to pass on. When these people are sentenced should they not lose some of their rights? For example, could these people not be put into work programs when they are in prison? The issue of restitution has been brought up. People feel that a percentage of the earnings of prisoners could possibly be used to compensate victims of crime. In this case, it was a terrible hardship for the wife when her husband was lured out of the home and killed. Work has a way of producing self-esteem and people very often feel this is something that is lacking and can have a very therapeutic effect.

I wonder if maybe the hon. member would like to make some comments about the courts being part of the problem and not just our laws.

[Human Rights, March 14th, 1994]

Mr. Speaker, my supplementary question is for the Minister of Justice.

Will the minister include a definition of sexual orientation in the legislation he proposes, and will this definition be clear enough to prevent pedophiles from launching successful court challenges of discrimination for acts that are clearly prohibited in the Criminal Code?

[Human Rights, March 14th, 1994]

Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Minister of Justice.

On January 27 the minister announced in the House the government's intention to introduce amendments to the Human Rights Act which "will include sexual orientation as a ground upon which discrimination is prohibited".

Could the minister tell the House what is the government's definition of sexual orientation?

[Gun Control, March 10th, 1994]

Mr. Speaker, Saskatchewan gun owners are not against safety and training in the use of firearms. They asked me to ask the minister how does putting more restrictions on law abiding and responsible gun owners in any way deter criminals from illegally acquiring these guns?

[Gun Control, March 10th, 1994]

Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Minister of Justice.

On Friday, March 4 I attended a rally with over 1,200 gun owners in Preeceville, Saskatchewan. They are extremely upset with the government's new gun control regulations.

There are two types of gun owners in Canada: law-abiding citizens and criminals. According to the Canadian Centre for Justice Statistics less than one-tenth of one per cent of registered handgun owners commit crimes with guns.

Could the minister explain how putting more controls on responsible gun owners better protects law abiding citizens?

[Capital Punishment, March 10th, 1994]

Mr. Speaker, in February newspapers reported that the Solicitor General promised sweeping reforms to the National Parole Board following the investigation into the release of Robert Leech, a convicted rapist sentenced to life imprisonment in 1972, whose subsequent parole resulted in the sadistic murder of Jewel Gamble in Regina in 1992.

Now that Mr. Leech has been sentenced to life imprisonment for the second time, we all wonder what steps the government

will take to ensure Mr. Leech never gets out of jail to rape and kill again. If Mr. Leech hoodwinks the parole system again, will he be released into our neighbourhood?

Considering the fact that national polls consistently indicate the majority of Canadians support a binding referendum on the reintroduction of capital punishment, I beg on behalf of this silenced majority that the government introduce legislation giving voters what they want, a binding vote on capital punishment.

[Excise Act, February 22nd, 1994]

Mr. Speaker, I do not know if I should put my hon. colleague on the hot seat, but I would like to run this past him and see how he would respond.

There are many honest citizens in this country who object to taxes but who do not break the law in order to make their point. Here we have a government that has responded to illegal activity and reduced taxes. There are many farmers who have supported the Reform Party who really want tax reduction. Why does the government not respond to them with the same urgency with which it responded to a certain element in society?

I wonder what my hon. colleague would say if I said there are many honest citizens in the country who really want tax reduction but do not break the law in order to do that. How can we reconcile what we have done here? If we support tax reduction for this reason why do we not have that same urgency in supporting it for the many honest people?

[Excise Act, February 22nd, 1994]

Mr. Speaker, I commend the Minister of Health on her presentation. I appreciate what the government is trying to do in this area. It has taken a balanced approach and has tried to address all the issues involved in this very complex problem.

My constituents have raised another health problem young people experience which relates directly to this issue. Some experts I have heard addressing this problem indicate that alcohol could also be one of the great problems we will be faced with. After all these measures are taken on tobacco, society's criminal elements will be looking for new ways to profit. There

is a large market in alcohol and they would target young people. Smuggling could suddenly become very profitable.

In light of the fact that this is a big problem among young people and is a potential smuggling problem, would the minister be willing to commit to take similar initiatives in the area of alcohol abuse and the smuggling which will take place as tobacco becomes controlled? Would she be willing to comment on or address this problem?

Many constituents are wondering about the domino effect. Will the reduction of taxes on tobacco mean a reduction of taxes on alcohol and many other products that are susceptible to being smuggled?

[Excise Act, February 22nd, 1994]

My apologies, Mr. Speaker. I will try to do better.

I had those two questions. I was virtually finished. I would just like to know what the impact would be on our law enforcement, justice and legal system and also what the cost revenue implications in the short and long term would be on the tax adjustments that have been made.

[Excise Act, February 22nd, 1994]

Mr. Speaker, I appreciate very much what the hon. minister has to say and agree very much with the necessary measures that he has had to take.

I wonder if he would be able to comment on a couple of the questions that I raised not directly related to Bill C-11. What would be the cost of the law enforcement and what would be the impact on our entire law enforcement, justice and legal system if these extra measures are put in place? Have there been any studies done on this? Do you know what the implications might be on this? What would be the cost revenue implications in the short and the long term of the tax reductions and export tax increases?

That is not directly related to Bill C-11 and you may not be able to comment on the second-