Nicole Demers

[Petitions, October 6th, 2010]

Mr. Speaker, I have the pleasure to present a petition signed by 456 people who are calling on the government to maintain the firearms registry.

[Census, October 5th, 2010]

Mr. Speaker, in April, the House of Commons unanimously adopted a motion recognizing unpaid work. By abolishing the long form census, the government will no longer be able to estimate unpaid work as measured by question 33, which is not included in the short form census.

How can this government both recognize the importance of volunteer work, and get rid of a tool to help adjust its programs to the needs of volunteers?

[National Women's Centres Day, October 5th, 2010]

Mr. Speaker, since 2003, the first Tuesday of October has been celebrated as National Women's Centres Day in Quebec. These centres, run by women and for women, are places where they can come together, get information, discuss issues and take action to change the world and their living conditions.

Some 25 years ago, these centres came together to form the “R des centres de femmes du Québec”, a network of autonomous, feminist, community-action-based groups in Quebec.

We owe a large part of our success in maintaining the firearms registry to these women and to all women's groups that mobilized and took action with us.

Solidarity makes all the difference. That is why I encourage all women's groups, particularly the AFEAS, to not give up the fight against this backward-thinking government, which, by eliminating question 33 of the long form census, is making it impossible to quantify invisible work, including family caregivers and women who chose to stay at home.

[Government Programs, June 15th, 2010]

Mr. Speaker, women's groups such as KAIROS, Match International and CCIC have all been victims of ideological and retaliatory cuts after having spoken out against Conservative policies. Community groups are so worried about facing the government's wrath that they are refusing to take part in public consultations.

Why is the Conservative government using public money to reward friends of the regime and silence groups that do not share its ideology?

[Protecting Victims from Sex Offenders Act, June 15th, 2010]

Mr. Speaker, my hon. colleague is quite right. They have been putting on these shows every day for nearly four and half years now, every time they introduce a bill to get tough on crime. It is time for the government to walk the talk. This government is all talk and no action when it comes to taking care of the victims of crime.

[Protecting Victims from Sex Offenders Act, June 15th, 2010]

Mr. Speaker, I agree completely. The police also need the money to take action. When this happened to my grandson, he told me he would like to go into schools and tell other young people what had happened to him. He talked to the people at the police station. They told him it was a good idea, but they had no money for that sort of thing.

There is no money for prevention or for obtaining IP addresses. There is no bill on the horizon to ensure that these offenders will be arrested before they commit or think of committing a crime.

[Protecting Victims from Sex Offenders Act, June 15th, 2010]

Mr. Speaker, there is a bill on Canadian Heritage and another for veterans. Is there one on agriculture? I do not think so, because the government wants to get rid of farms that take advantage of agriculture programs. There are no bills to specifically help victims of crime. That is what we find most disappointing. Fighting crime is good, but it would be even better to ensure that crime victims receive the care they require, the resources they need and money to get themselves back on track, reintegrate into society and start living a normal life.

[Protecting Victims from Sex Offenders Act, June 15th, 2010]

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to rise in this House to speak to this very important Bill S-2. However, I find that it is a little late in the session for this, even very late, because we will be adjourning soon. I also wonder whether the government is ultimately responsible for things dragging on like this. We know that this bill has been introduced a number of times, but when the government prorogued Parliament and then called an election, bills have died on the order paper.

The government often accuses the Bloc Québécois of siding with the criminals. When we see what is going on with this bill today, we wonder whether it is the government that is siding with the criminals since the government is the one that has been holding up this bill and delaying its passage until now. We were in favour of this bill. My colleague from Charlesbourg—Haute-Saint-Charles can make faces and shake his head, but it is his government's fault that the bill is being debated in this House right now when it should have been debated and passed a long time ago.

When we talk about criminals who commit offences against young people, who are pedophiles or who commit offences against women or even men, we must ensure that the police have all the necessary tools to find those criminals and ensure that they do not commit any more offences. We were talking about pedophilia on the Internet. I must say that I had a particularly traumatic experience with that.

My grandson is 17 years old now. Two years ago, he called me at my office in Laval, where I see my constituents one day a week. He called to tell me the police were coming to the house. I wondered, “Why are the police coming to the house? What have you done?” Obviously, that was a gut reaction. We do not think it is because someone else did something. We think right away that our children are the guilty ones. So I asked, “What did you do, Alexis? Why are the police going to the house?” He said, “Grandma, someone made advances toward me on the Internet and I did what you told me, I called the police. They are coming here to see if they can catch him. They asked me to remain in contact with him on the Internet until they arrive. They are coming, they are on the way.” So I said, “OK, let me know what happens. I am in my office. I am meeting people here and cannot leave right away, but I am anxious to know what happens”.

About 30 minutes later, a policeman called me to say, “Madam, we are at your place and your grandson is with us. Do not worry. We should tell you we are going to take action to arrest this person. Through your grandson, we set up a meeting with him in a particular place and we are going to wait for him. We will hide and your grandson will be the bait so that we can catch the person”. I said, “Well, excuse me but I do not agree with that entirely. You are going to use him as a lure, as bait. How do I know that he will be safe, that he will not be at risk? We do not know who the person is. How can I be sure my grandson will not be in danger?” I was very worried and told him, “I am going home and will try to get there before you leave with my grandson”.

I obviously wanted justice to be done and this criminal arrested. That is for sure. I was also thinking about my grandson’s safety. I arrived at the house, but they had already left. My blood just froze. I thought, “What is going on? Where have they taken him? Where are they meeting this man, this criminal? Are they going to arrest him or something?” I waited and waited very impatiently for the phone to ring. I did not dare use it for anything because I did not want to miss the call. Finally, about 45 minutes later, the phone rang and my grandson said, “Grandma, it is OK, they arrested him”, and he told me where they were. They were at the variety store at the corner of Montée Masson and des Mille-Îles boulevard. They laid a trap. My grandson had said he would meet the person there. The police told my grandson, “Regardless of what he says, do not get into his vehicle. Talk to him through the window on the driver’s side to say hello and tell him you are the person he was talking to. There has to be contact. Go to the other side, but stay outside the vehicle and wait for him to say to get in”.

The two police officers were hiding; one was inside the convenience store and the other behind a bush. The man twice told my grandson to get into the car. The officers had told my grandson that when the man asked him the second time he was to open the car door. At that point, the officers would take action and arrest the man in question.

After the man asked my grandson to get into the car a second time, the police arrested him. There was a coil of rope and a knife on the back seat of his car. The police also found videos. This person had been charged a number of times in the past. Thanks to my grandson's presence of mind, and what I had taught him, this man was arrested. Today, he is in prison for a full seven years.

Under the bill presently before us, he will have to register with the registry when he leaves prison. If the bill we are debating is adopted now, he will have to register. The police will know who he is; they will know this person and be aware of his criminal activities. That may save the lives of other children. One never knows.

It is very important to the Bloc Québécois that this bill be debated, voted on and adopted. We hope that, for once, the government will do more than just talk to convince us that it wants to help victims, especially since it is not renewing the mandate of the Ombudsman for Victims of Crime. The government does not even have the courage to renew the mandate of a man who has done remarkable things for victims. His major mistake may have been to ask for money to help them.

Why does the government want to spend so much on criminals and so little on victims? If we really want to help victims, we should also provide money for them. It is nice to have a registry, but I will only be satisfied once it is efficient and once police officers can use it on a daily basis, just like they use the gun registry every day to prevent crime and to ensure that people we love are not murdered. In order to achieve that result, the government must stop introducing bills at the end of sessions. The government always pretends that it wants to put criminals behind bars. However, when we introduce legislation that would keep these criminals in jail, such as abolishing parole after serving one-sixth of a sentence, the government shows no interest.

There is a French song that goes like this: “Paroles, paroles, paroles”, talk, talk, talk. That is all the government does when it comes to dealing with criminals. And it is even worse in the case of victims. The government calls on people who make senseless speeches about deer, hunting and single mothers. It makes no sense at all. It is as if single mothers are responsible for the fact that there are no hunters anymore. And because there are no hunters, there are too many deer, and if there are too many deer around, then we do not need the gun registry. If the gun registry exists, some deer will get killed. And if deer are killed, what will single mothers do? That just does not make sense. It is as ridiculous as the billions of dollars that are being spent on the G8 and the G20. It is insane. There is no consistency at all in the government's policy against criminals. The only thing that is consistent is the lack of consistency.

Still, I hope we can vote on this bill, because it is very important for the future of our children, of the women and of the persons who are sexually abused. We also need to know the identity of those individuals who have committed other crimes.

We want to do more prevention, but we must be careful not to violate the rights and freedoms of individuals who are found not guilty by the courts, after being targeted because of a judicial error, or any other reason.

Mr. Speaker, I thank you for taking the time to listen to my remarks. I will be pleased to answer my colleague's questions.

[Petitions, June 14th, 2010]

Mr. Speaker, I am honoured to present another petition calling on the Government of Canada to develop an administrative agreement with the Government of Quebec giving all pregnant women in Quebec the right to access the preventive withdrawal program offered by Quebec's occupational health and safety commission.

This time, we received the petition from different groups, including the Outremont branch of the Syndicat des employées et employés professionnels-les de bureau; the Centre des femmes dynamiques de Laval; the Syndicat des employé(e)s de Vidéotron, Montreal; the West Island Women's Shelter, Kirkland; the Fédération des agricultrices du Québec, Longueuil; the Regroupement des femmes de la région de Matane, La Ressource, Montreal; the Centre des femmes du Témiscouata; PSAC, Rimouski; the Service Employees Union, Montreal; the Service des travaux publics de Boisbriand; Employment and Social Solidarity, Montreal; and the Syndicat des débardeurs, the Port of Montreal.

[2010 Shaved Head Challenge, June 14th, 2010]

Mr. Speaker, the 10th annual Leucan Shaved Head Challenge was held yesterday. It is with great pride and a great deal of compassion that three of my employees, the member for Gatineau and myself shaved our heads.

Over the past 10 years, more than 40,000 people have decided to shave their heads to support children with cancer who have lost their hair after chemotherapy treatments. In addition to showing solidarity, the challenge is a fundraiser, with those shaving off their hair collecting pledges.

This year, more than 9,000 people shaved their heads and collected $4.5 million.

We hope that this record number of participants in the Leucan Shaved head Challenge not only will help children to not feel singled out but will also give them hope for a cure one day thanks to the donations collected.