Pablo Rodriguez

[An Act to authorize the Minister of Finance to make Certain Payments, May 19th, 2005]

Mr. Speaker, I rise on a point of order. I would like to seek the unanimous consent of this House to table a report by the Standing Committee on Official Languages, which received the unanimous approval of all members of the committee.

[Supply, March 10th, 2005]

Mr. Speaker, I thank my hon. colleague for his question. In fact, he has answer it in part when he said that the Liberal caucus had spoken out against their closure. I too have spoken out against the closure of the RCMP detachments, and the hon. member for Brome—Missisquoi has been very active on this file.

As far as I and the members of the caucus are concerned, we would rather a different decision had been made.

[Supply, March 10th, 2005]

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to express my support for a Charter of Rights and Freedoms viable reverse onus of proof in the proceeds of crime cases.

Currently, the Criminal Code does allow for the forfeiture of proceeds of crime allows the forfeiture of the proceeds of crime, upon application by the Crown, and after a conviction for a designated offence. Once culpability has been proven, the Crown must show on a balance of probabilities that the property is the proceeds of crime and that the property is connected to the crime.

If no connection between the offence for which the offender was convicted and the property is established, the judge may order the forfeiture of the property if he or she is satisfied beyond a reasonable doubt that the property is proceeds of crime.

Although these provisions have been in force for quite some time and have in fact been successful to a significant degree, we need to work towards ensuring that criminals, especially those primarily motivated by financial benefit, do not profit from their ill-gotten gains.

Committing crime for financial benefit is the hallmark of organized crime. Whether these crimes involve drugs, prostitution, fraud or whatever, organized crime is fuelled by greed.

It is the proceeds of this criminal activity which allow organized criminals to commit further crime, recruit further members and facilitate generally the criminal operation of these groups. Organized crime demands specific, focussed and sustained responses.

We as a Liberal government have taken significant steps over the past few years in the fight against organized crime, first with Bill C-95, in 1997, and, most recently, in 2001, with Bill C-24.

Bill C-24, which came into force in 2002, included a simplified definition of “criminal organization”, three new criminal organization offences and tough sentencing and parole eligibility provisions.

These amendments also improved the protection from intimidation for people who play a role in the justice system and broadened law enforcement powers to forfeit the proceeds of crime and seize property that was used in a crime.

This clearly demonstrates that this Liberal government is committed to combating organized crime.

These and other tools found in the Criminal Code are being used by law enforcement and prosecutors in the fight against organized crime.

Despite significant legislative activity in this area recently, we need to evaluate whether prosecutors have all the necessary tools to advance on this front, as organized crime groups are now becoming increasingly sophisticated, complex and adaptive in their criminal ventures.

Clearly, this assessment should examine whether a reverse onus in proceeds of crime cases would contribute to the disruption of criminal organizations. In my view it would.

As this matter advances, it is important to have the views of the provinces on this issue. In many cases, their prosecutors are the ones bringing the proceeds of crime applications, given their authority to prosecute most Criminal Code offences.

As a government, we have taken a step in the right direction. In January 2005, federal, provincial and territorial ministers for justice discussed proposals to change the Criminal Code to create a reverse onus for the proceeds of crime regime.

According to joint news release issued, and I quote:

All Ministers agreed that the ability to obtain the forfeiture of proceeds of crime is needed and the federal justice minister said he intends to move forward as quickly as possible with changes that meet charter requirements.

The federal-provincial-territorial forum is useful in gauging provincial support on issues such as these. Based on the outcome from this meeting, it appears there is general support for the need to advance a reverse onus provision that is within the parameters of the Charter.

The requirement that any advancement in this area be viable from a charter perspective is a very important one. A balance must be struck in crafting a reverse onus scheme which represents a useful tool for prosecutors, over and above what is now available under our current proceeds of crime scheme, while doing so within the limits prescribed by the Constitution.

This is a very important consideration as charter viability will ensure that our prosecutors will have this tool, and that it will be effective to take away criminal profits for years to come.

This motion is directed at ensuring that criminals are not permitted to financially or materially benefit from the commission of criminal offences. It is one which is targeted at fighting crime in the most effective way—by taking the profit out of it.

[Parental Leave, March 7th, 2005]

Mr. Speaker, last week, the government concluded a final agreement with the Government of Quebec concerning parental leave.

Can the minister explain to us what this agreement represents, both in terms of federal-provincial relations and socially, for Quebec parents?

[Anjou Peewee Tournament, February 14th, 2005]

Mr. Speaker, I want to point out the huge success of the 29th edition of the Anjou national peewee hockey tournament.

Year after year, for 29 years, this remarkable tournament has been a gathering point where young people from all over Quebec and even further afield meet in healthy competition and camaraderie.

Quite a few National Hockey League players once skated in this prestigious tournament.

For all those who will not reach the major leagues, this event is still an enriching and unforgettable experience.

Without the dedication of organizers and other volunteers, these young people would not have such an opportunity to take to the ice and demonstrate their talent and energy.

And so, here in this House, I want to express my most sincere congratulations to all the players, organizers and volunteers in this unparalleled event.

[Supply, February 8th, 2005]

No, Mr. Speaker, I will support the motion.

(The House divided on the motion, which was agreed to on the following division:)

[Supply, November 16th, 2004]

Mr. Chair, I would like to take a few minutes to talk about a subject of great interest to me, literature. I know that a good number of my colleagues here share the same passion.

You all know that Canadian literature has grown remarkably over the past 25 years. Thirty years ago, foreign editors had taken over nearly the whole market, and foreign books dominated on the shelves of Canadian bookstores. Today, Canadian owned publishing companies have recovered a substantial part of the Canadian market.

They have increased their share by 26% in 20 years and they now control more than half the domestic market. Compared with 25 years ago, there are three times the number of publishers owned by Canadian interests, four times the number of books published every year and five times the number of Canadian authors recognized nationally and internationally.

As Alice Munro said in her words of thanks Thursday night at the Giller Prize ceremony—and the minister was there—Canadian literature has come a long way since the time when she was working in a Victoria bookstore and clients were telling her, with some pride unfortunately, that they were not reading Canadian authors.

Today, Canadians are proud to read Canadian literature and understand the importance of Canadian fiction. Nowadays, Canadian literature is one of the richest in the world. In both official languages, our children's literature tells stories taking place in Canada, illustrates our values and is a testimony to our history. In addition, our fiction publishing is of unparalleled quality thanks to the major publishing firms belonging to Canadian interests, such as Boréal and McClelland & Stewart. The Canadian stories published by these firms are of vital importance to our nation because they reflect the regional, linguistic and ethnocultural vitality of Canada and remind us of our common values.

The money paid by the government to Canadian authors and publishers has contributed to creating a niche for these stories and, by and large, to the success of Canadian books.

Canadians are now thrilled by Canadian literature and celebrate our authors and their work through award presentations including the Giller Prize, the Athanase-David Prize and the Governor General's literary awards as well as through literary festivals and book fairs held throughout Canada every year. It is important to mention that.

In fact, this week, on Thursday, November 18, the 27th Annual Salon du livre de Montréal will open its doors. I will certainly be there. This bookfair is not only the most important French fair in North America, it is also the second largest francophone event of its kind in the world. The ever-increasing interest for awards and fairs, such as the Salon du livre de Montréal, is another monument to the success of Canadian literature.

Canadians love Canadian books because they are diverse enough to please all readers.

The unprecedented success of Canadian literature and the important part played by the government in that success are absolutely undeniable. However, the problems that our publishers face while developing literary content for a population as small and diverse as Canada's are also very real.

I would like the Minister of Canadian Heritage to tell this House how the government can ensure that our book industry can continue to meet these challenges and to maintain its status as a world-renowned producer of literature.

[An Act to establish the Economic Development Agency of Canada for the Regions of Quebec, November 15th, 2004]

Madam Speaker, I would say that the involvement of Canada Economic Development at the regional level is highly relevant.

I myself had the opportunity of seeing this last week. To answer the member's question, I could enumerate numerous initiatives where Canada Economic Development plays an important role in the various regions of Quebec. It responds to community needs and consultations. We have the support of mayors, stakeholders and developers.

Last week, for example, I went to La Macaza to make an announcement in support of the report project at that level. All the local stakeholders attended and clearly said that this bill was long overdue and that they are pleased with the involvement of Canada Economic Development.

This is one initiative, but there are many others. What is clear is that there is a consensus in Quebec for the agency to continue to play its role. I would appreciate it if the member would recognize that also.

[An Act to establish the Economic Development Agency of Canada for the Regions of Quebec, November 15th, 2004]

Madam Speaker, I thank my colleague for his question. I want to reassure him; I speak regularly with my neighbour. He is a very good friend.

I would like to say that the development strategies of Canada Economic Development are implemented in cooperation with the community and are in fact established with the community. I myself have had the opportunity to see this regularly when I met with community stakeholders, like mayors or project developers, or even when I went to make announcements just recently. People from the community were there and applauded the effort of Canada Economic Development because it was relevant, necessary and based on a consensus within the community.

I would say that there is another clear consensus in Quebec. Perhaps the Bloc is the only one not to agree with this. However, the consensus is that this bill must be approved.

[An Act to establish the Economic Development Agency of Canada for the Regions of Quebec, November 15th, 2004]

Madam Speaker, at the beginning of his speech, my colleague was saying that the federal government was unaware of what the right hand was doing while the left hand was doing something else. I disagree with that.

The reality is that the hon. member would like to cut off both of our hands, in other words, to prevent the Canadian government from intervening in the regions. The fact that Economic Development Canada works so efficiently and that it helps the regions where needed may be a problem for our friends and colleagues of the Bloc Québécois, who want Quebec to withdraw from Canada.

Therefore, if we are successful in the regions, if we are contributing to the creation of jobs and if a presence of the federal government is relevant and deserving to be highlighted, this obviously goes against the ultimate objective of the Bloc, which is to separate Quebec from Canada.

With respect to the cadet camp, I have to say that no decision has been made so far. For the time being, the hon. member is crying wolf and is being an alarmist, but no decision has been made yet in this respect.