Jinny Sims

[Protecting Canada's Immigration System Act, April 23rd, 2012]

Mr. Speaker, I congratulate the member on his inaugural speech, which was very well executed. I look forward to working with the member.

This particular legislation has all kinds of pitfalls. It is difficult to know where to start, but I will start with the children. Under this legislation, when some of the most vulnerable people from around the world come to our shores, we are going to say to them that we are going to put them in detention, basically prison. That is what detention is. People will not have the freedom to move around and will not have travel documents.

We heard the minister explain previously that for children who are under 16 years of age, the parents can choose to relinquish them to the state, to the province, or to keep them in detention. For parents, there is no choice. It is so disturbing that that is where our immigration and refugee policy is going.

What kind of impacts are these detentions going to have on children?

[Safer Railways Act, April 5th, 2012]

Mr. Speaker, it is no secret that I agree with my colleague that the Senate is not a democratic institution. It now seems to be filled with failed candidates from previous elections. It has become a payola and retirement gift to many. As I said when the banking legislation came before us, it had no right to go to the Senate first, it should have started here. As a democratic institution, Parliament in Canada is at risk and our parliamentary democracy is at risk with all the time allocations and playing around with the rules to--

[Safer Railways Act, April 5th, 2012]

Mr. Speaker, I agree with my colleague. We need to invest in our infrastructure. We should be moving more freight by rail. We should also improve our passenger service between cities. Besides the environmental impact, it is less stressful for people to sit on a train than it is for them to drive through traffic for hours.

[Safer Railways Act, April 5th, 2012]

Mr. Speaker, it was heartbreaking for me when the passenger railroad service from Nanaimo to Victoria stopped. When my children were little one of their favourite outings was to get on the train to downtown Victoria, go to the museum and the legislature, go to the park for a picnic, and get back on the train for home. It was a very safe way to travel. I spent quality time with my children. However, many passenger railroads in B.C. have been closed.

Last summer when I was in the Rockies I had the pleasure of watching the train that goes through the bypass in the Rockies. I could see the beginning, the middle and the end of the train at the same time. I would have stayed there for another day to see that all over again but for some weird reason my partner would not agree.

[Safer Railways Act, April 5th, 2012]

Mr. Speaker, it is my pleasure today to rise and speak in support of this bill.

It always takes a tragedy to focus our attention on safety. I and my colleagues from across the aisle and on this side extend our sympathies to the communities and the families of those who lost their loved ones in a very tragic accident, which all of us watched in our living rooms over and over again. For many of the commuters who were on their way home and got tossed around, their families at home suffered a great deal of anxiety, as well as the ones who actually on site.

It always takes a tragedy to draw our attention to the fact that we need to attend to modernizing our regulations to be current with the systems today. It was thus in 2000. It was in the early 2000s, after a spate of unfortunate accidents that led to tragic consequences, that the House first started to look at reviewing the Railway Safety Act. It has been going through various iterations, but here we are in 2012 and the legislation has still not passed through the House. I am not blaming anybody. I am just saying these are the kinds of things that happen.

I will reiterate a comment I have heard from many people that train travel is one of the safest ways to travel. We are not saying there is an inordinate number of accidents that lead to fatalities. We are saying that even one, two, three or four are too many. We want to prevent that by modernizing and bringing our regulations up to date to match the new technologies that exist today.

Our pioneers had great vision and they built the railways right across this great country. Why? Because they saw the need to connect us from coast to coast.

Even today I would like to see the government invest significant dollars in railway infrastructure, because railways do provide a safe way of transportation, and the least environmentally harmful.

Ever since I was a little girl I have been in love with trains. Whether it was due to the early books I read or some of the adventures I had the pleasure to go on, I think there is nothing on this planet that beats railway travel. I have had the pleasure of travelling through most of Europe and India by train, following the writing of Theroux of the great railway journey, and it was truly amazing.

I am looking forward to the day that I will have time to travel across this great country by rail. The best form of a holiday I could imagine would be to travel across Canada and see our beautiful landscape and diverse geography, sitting on a beautiful train. Therefore, I think it is critical that we ensure our trains are safe, notwithstanding the fact that we need more trains, especially passenger trains to give Canadians that opportunity, though I am sure we need more commercial trains as well.

Also, as we look at our environment, the price of gas and many other things, improved railway travel between cities and across this great nation would be a great asset to this country. If we are looking at train travel, one of the key things we have to do is make sure our railways are regulated in such a way that it is a safe way to travel.

As I said previously, railroad travel is one of the safest ways to travel. The Burlington tragedy reminded us that we need to modernize and upgrade our regulations. That is what the bill purports to do. It does not fix everything. I am sure there will be amendments to try to improve safety from all sides when it gets to committee. When it comes to the safety of Canadians or the tourists who visit our great land, I just cannot imagine putting a price on that kind of safety. I hope that there will be very little resistance, and all sides of the House will make sure that this legislation passes.

The recent tragedy also showed us that employers have a responsibility to provide safety to their workers. Health and safety issues are very critical. As a result, we have to ensure that workers who work on our railroads have all the protection they need.

The regulation changes we are looking for are more protection for passengers and more protection for the workers, who of course devote very privileged hundreds of hours on the train. I think trains are so wonderful.

I encourage all my colleagues in the House to take some time to explore our beautiful country by getting on a train with their families. They should leave their BlackBerrys aside and just enjoy our geography. They should look out, as they travel through the Rockies, and see Banff in all its glory, and as they go through the prairies, look into field after field of very rich agricultural land.

I wish that in my riding of Newton—North Delta we actually had passenger railroad service. If we had it, I would certainly get on those trains often. I am a great fan of railroad travel.

This piece of legislation has been through this House before. It has been through the Senate. It has received good support wherever it has gone. I think it is time to act on it. The bill was first introduced in June 2010 after various studies at committees, which started in 2006. We studied regulations and safety for four years. Then the bill was introduced. It went through various iterations, did not make it through the timelines for whatever reason. Now we have a wonderful opportunity to act to ensure safety for workers and passengers.

The bill at the Senate stage, where people came to bear witness, was supported by the unions that have workers on the railroad service. It was supported by the National Legislative Director of the Teamsters. It was supported by Carla White-Taylor, director of the Rail Safety Secretariat.

There is significant support for the bill. I hope we can get it through this House fairly quickly, through the committee stage where, I am sure, after all we are parliamentarians, there will be some tweaking. I am sure we will all be open to tweakings, because we all get along so well at committee stage.

This is an opportunity for us where we have a common goal. I agree with my colleague across the way because he is from Burlington and he saw the impact of that tragedy. We could only empathize with it and send our sympathies from afar. He lives there, so he is just as committed to ensuring safety regulations for the railroad as we are on this side of the House.

This is one of those cases where we can act in a non-partisan way for the good of all who love to travel by railroad. There is no better way to travel.

Mr. Speaker, could you please give me leave to split my time with my colleague--

[Foreign Affairs, April 3rd, 2012]

I will talk about freedoms, Mr. Speaker. Henk Tepper is now back home and safe, but questions still remain. His family and lawyers spoke to the media yesterday and they have nothing good to say about the government's efforts in this case. The Tepper family does not seem to think that the government did anything at all.

The minister keeps talking about quiet diplomacy. What does it mean?

[The Budget, April 3rd, 2012]

According to the finance minister, we are always doing better.

[The Budget, April 3rd, 2012]

Why don't they want to have these tabled?

[The Budget, April 3rd, 2012]

Madam Speaker, I rise on a point of order. I hate to interrupt my hon. colleague from Burnaby—New Westminster, who has been speaking quite eloquently this morning on this reckless budget that is hurting Canadian families.

At the end of my point of order, I intend to seek the unanimous consent of the House, so I hope that you, Madam Speaker, will hear me out.

My friend from British Columbia has been reading into the record emails and tweets that he has received from concerned Canadians from coast to coast to coast. A lot of these remarks are from Canadians in Conservative-held ridings, so it has been invaluable to hear their perspectives and for their own members to hear their objections to the budget. It is important for these emails to be part of the record so that all members can consult them in their work. I therefore seek the unanimous consent of the House for Mr. Julian to table the emails that he is reading from this morning.

[Official Development Assistance Accountability Act, April 3rd, 2012]

moved for leave to introduce Bill C-412, An Act to amend the Official Development Assistance Accountability Act (poverty reduction).

Madam Speaker, as the official opposition critic for international co-operation, I am pleased to introduce an act to amend the Official Development Assistance Accountability Act, seconded by the member for Laurier—Sainte-Marie.

My bill seeks to ensure that Canada meets the international target for donor countries of spending the equivalent of 0.7% of GNI on official overseas development assistance.

New Democrats believe that Canada can and should do more to help the world's poorest countries and people. In fact, the NDP official opposition is the only party in Canada that remains committed to former prime minister Lester B. Pearson's aspirations of dedicating 0.7% of our gross national income to development funding.

In our 2011 platform, we called for an immediate increase of $500 millions to Canada's ODA envelope, followed by a practical plan to reach the 0.7% over time.

For the NDP, this is not just an election issue. In 2005, our late leader, Jack Layton, was presented with a rare opportunity to rewrite a Liberal government budget. Jack cancelled billions of dollars in corporate tax cuts and invested the funds in priority areas, including a major boost to Canada's ODA.

When we consider that the 0.7% goal was originally set by former Liberal prime minister Lester B. Pearson and that the Conservatives believe in a robust foreign aid system, I hope my bill might find support from all corners of the House.

(Motions deemed adopted, bill read the first time and printed)