Philip Toone

[Business of Supply, October 31st, 2011]

Mr. Speaker, I thank my hon. colleague for her speech. It was very informative.

The use of asbestos in Canada is tightly regulated by Canada's Hazardous Products Act. Yet the member for Mégantic—L'Érable said that chrysotile fibres can be used safely. I am trying to understand this better. I would also like to know what my colleague thinks of the fact that Canada has not signed the Rotterdam Convention and how much this affects the use of chrysotile fibres in the developing world. It can be very unsafe and dangerous for the people of other countries.

[Federal Framework for Suicide Prevention Act, October 28th, 2011]

Mr. Speaker, I rise today in the House to support Bill C-300, regarding the creation of a federal framework for suicide prevention.

The NDP congratulates the member for Kitchener—Conestoga for introducing this bill. For years, the NDP has been calling on the government to develop a national suicide prevention strategy. It is encouraging to see the Conservative government introduce a bill to address the serious issue of suicide at the national level.

The issue of suicide is particularly worrisome to me. I cannot forget the recent suicide of Jamie Hubley, a 16-year-old gay man who was the victim of harassment by his peers. As member of the NDP's lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender caucus, I was proud to hear our caucus's LGBT critic, the member for Esquimalt—Juan de Fuca, speak in the House of Commons on October 20, Spirit Day.

Spirit Day was started in 2010 by Canadian teenager Brittany McMillan to remember the LGBT and questioning youth lost to suicide. Spirit Day is also a time to rally governments and institutions nationwide to denounce homophobic bullying, which is a major contributor to these tragic losses.

In the Gaspé, this issue has many faces, and every year dozens of families and children are tragically left in mourning. These situations are even more tragic because they are often shrouded in silence and guilt.

In Gaspésie—Îles-de-la-Madeleine the suicide rate per hundred thousand people is 25.2. This is far above the Quebec average, which is 15.

According to the Portrait statistique des conduites suicidaires en Gaspésie—Îles-de-la-Madeleine, a report on suicide published in 2009 by the health and social services agency in Gaspésie—Îles-de-la-Madeleine:

The Gaspésie—Îles-de-la-Madeleine region has one of the highest suicide rates in Quebec. The region's suicide rate is 64% higher than the provincial rate.

According to statistics from 2003-2007, men in the region have a significantly higher suicide rate than other Quebeckers.

According to the most recent data, the regional hospitalization rate for suicide attempts is significantly higher than the provincial rate.

Following the increase in suicide in the 1990s, the provincial rate has decreased since the start of the 2000s. However, studies on suicide trends in Gaspésie—Îles-de-la-Madeleine paint a different [and very worrying] picture for the region, where the suicide rate continues to increase.

This increase in the regional suicide rate since the mid-1990s is mainly attributable to the increase in the number of male deaths. If we compare the five 5-year periods between 1983 and 2007, it is clear that the male suicide rate significantly increased during that period. For example, the suicide rate for males in the region increased from 25.4 per 100,000 in 1998-1992 to 38.1 per 100,000 in 2003-2007.

Suicide affects every part of society; however, there are some segments in which the suicide rate is quite a bit higher for social, economic and personal reasons. These segments must therefore be directly targeted by a national suicide prevention strategy. We are speaking about aboriginal people; youth, particularly young men; people with disabilities; abuse victims; seniors; people suffering from serious mental illness; lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgendered people; and others.

While I applaud the member for Kitchener—Conestoga for bringing the bill forward and recognizing that suicide is a medical issue that needs to be dealt with nationally, it is also true that suicide is much more than a medical issue. It is a social and economic issue as well.

In fact, a recent study by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention concludes that suicide rates rise and fall with the economy. In tough economic times, suicide rates go up as people lose their jobs and often their homes.

According to the study published in the American Journal of Public Health in 2011:

The overall suicide rate generally rose in recessions like the Great Depression (1929-1933), the end of the New Deal (1937-1938), the Oil Crisis (1973-1975), and the Double-Dip Recession (1980-1982) and fell in expansions like the WWII period (1939-1945) and the longest expansion period (1991-2001) in which the economy experienced fast growth and low unemployment.

If we want to keep people from falling through the cracks, we need to ensure they have decent jobs and good government services.

My riding is made up of dozens of small towns and villages. Because there are no large cities in the region, residents do not have access to all the social and economic supports and services available to city dwellers. The government services we do have are crucial to our well-being.

Federal government services and programs like those offered by Service Canada centres and post offices are anchors for the communities in the Gaspé and the Islands. This is why the NDP is fighting to stop the Conservative government from closing down Service Canada centres in regions like mine.

At the New Richmond Service Canada centre, as many as 30 employees could lose their jobs delivering essential services to my constituents, services like employment insurance benefits. Citizens in my riding rely on EI payments to keep food on the table when they are out of work.

The Service Canada centre in New Richmond also provides access to training programs for aboriginal people, labour market information, disability benefits, pensions, old age security and job search tools. All these services help keep people from falling through the cracks. They help keep communities intact by making it easier for people to stay in their regions instead of being forced to move to a big city to find work and obtain government services.

Suicide is a problem for the communities in my riding, but in fact it is a national problem. People in distress need support in their community and appropriate public health resources. The suicide rate in Canada is one of the highest in the industrialized world. In Canada, 10 suicides are committed a day, or more than 3,500 suicides a year. More than 100,000 Canadians have committed suicide over the past 20 years. Suicide is the third leading cause of death among people aged 25 to 49 and the second leading cause of death among those aged 10 to 24.

In Canada, the number of people affected by suicide is roughly 3 million. No sector of Canadian society is spared from suicide and everyone suffers from the stigma attached to suicide, depression, addiction and mental illness. Suicide is symptomatic of a community that is not doing well, that is facing challenges. That is why Canadian society as a whole has to work on finding solutions to deal with this scourge.

It is this need to act on a national level that makes Bill C-300 so important. It is a first step in ensuring that Canada has a national strategy for addressing suicide.

The bill calls on the Government of Canada to establish a federal framework for suicide prevention that recognizes suicide, in addition to being a mental health issue, is a public health issue and that, as such, it is a health and safety priority.

The bill would ensure that suicide prevention is a national priority and would allow experts to work toward reducing Canada's suicide rate. Given time and the political will, we can move our communities to a place where the factors that can lead to or cause suicide are significantly improved upon.

I call on the Conservative government to pass the bill, but I also call on the Conservative members to consider that suicide is more than a mental health problem. It is just as much a problem caused by the weakening of our society and our economy. It is the Conservative government's responsibility to invest in Canada's economy and to maintain and improve the essential programs and services that all Canadians rely on.

[Ending the Long-gun Registry Act, October 28th, 2011]

Mr. Speaker, I thank my dear colleague for his comments. We must keep and even improve all tools available to the police. Our firearms registry has proven its worth. It could be improved. We are listening to what our police officers and all stakeholders have to say in order to improve the tools available.

This bill affects the most disadvantaged people, who feel attacked and targeted. We must take that into consideration. If we scrap the firearms registry, we will be endangering the lives of countless Canadians. That is unacceptable. Police officers are aware of this. They have told us many times that the registry must be kept in place. We want to save Canadians' lives. Scrapping the firearms registry will have the opposite effect. It will put the lives of people at risk, especially women, but also gay people and members of cultural communities. Almost all these people are wondering what is happening. We will pay a high price for the $4 million a year in savings.

[Ending the Long-gun Registry Act, October 28th, 2011]

Mr. Speaker, I want to thank the hon. member for his comments. The contradiction is quite clear. They want to save $4 million a year by scrapping the firearms registry, but they are going to spend an undetermined, exorbitant amount of money on opening new prisons across Canada. I understand this might create some jobs. I am happy for the guards. I used to be a teacher and I taught some of them; I tip my hat to them. However, why does the government want to build more prisons? In the meantime, it does not want to use the existing tools to save the lives of Canadians. Honestly, I do not understand this.

We have adequate tools. We do not need to burden the Criminal Code with new legislation that will impose harsher sentences on people who commit crimes. I do not see how a harsher sentence is going to save the life of woman who is already dead. However, with the firearms registry, we can prevent that woman from being killed and prevent a trial. We can ensure that, in the case of a man who might fire a gun without thinking, the police will be there to intervene in a situation that would otherwise be, most unfortunately, fatal.

[Ending the Long-gun Registry Act, October 28th, 2011]

Mr. Speaker, I thank my hon. colleague for his comments. They are very much appreciated.

I am having a really hard time understanding why the Conservatives refuse to take the viewpoint of police officers from across Canada into account. The Canadian Association of Chiefs of Police and associations like the Montreal Police Brotherhood have told us over and over again that the registry is very useful and that it saves lives, including their own. They are the ones in danger on the front lines. They are there to protect us, and the Conservatives are telling them that their lives are not important enough to give them all the tools available to protect themselves. They are there to help the public in situations of domestic violence, as pointed out by my colleague across the floor, to help women who are in danger. Police officers have told us many times that the firearms registry is relevant and that it is worth keeping it at a cost of $4 million a year.

I have a question for the Conservatives: how much is one life worth?

[Ending the Long-gun Registry Act, October 28th, 2011]

Mr. Speaker, the rate of murders in situations of conjugal violence since the registry has been put in place has dropped by 50%. Innumerable lives have been saved with the registry. The fact that there continues to be violence in conjugal situations is unfortunate and I do not think we can claim that we will ever put a complete stop to it.

However, the registry has proven to be effective. It has reduced the number of murders in this country. We are pleased to see that the registry is used by police in order to defend women in situations where they are likely to be victims. I do not see any contradiction in thinking that $4 million a year to save even one life is worth it.

[Ending the Long-gun Registry Act, October 28th, 2011]

Mr. Speaker, I will try to be brief. I want to remind members of what I said yesterday about the bill before us, because the members who are here today may not have heard.

The gun registry protects women, cultural communities, gays and the disadvantaged in Canada. I cannot believe that the government actually wants to abolish it.

I would like to remind members why we have the gun registry. What motivated Quebeckers and Canadians to create this registry? Members will recall that on December 6, 1989, 14 women were killed at the École Polytechnique in Montreal. I was there when it happened. I remember the vigil. I remember people's faces that night. They could not believe that 14 women were dead because a man felt emasculated. That is absolutely unbelievable.

I remember the faces of my colleagues that night. The shock, sadness and anger were obvious. I remember my many colleagues, the Montrealers who gathered at the École Polytechnique, the women who went to the Université de Montréal, the vigil where everyone was asking the same questions. Why? What happened? Did we understand correctly? Did Marc Lépine feel so emasculated that he had to kill 14 women?

Marc Lépine left a note that night. He wrote:

Know that I am committing suicide today 89/12/06 not for economic reasons...but rather for political reasons. I have decided to send feminists, who have done nothing but ruin my life, to their Maker—to the kingdom of the dead.

That event led to the creation of the registry we have today. We remember that before the registry was created, there was another massacre in Montreal. Valery Fabrikant killed four of his colleagues at Concordia University. I was there at that time as well. He killed four of his colleagues. Now they are dead. I want to repeat their names: department head Phoivos Ziogas; professors Matthew Douglas and Jaan Saber; and president of the teachers' union at Concordia University, Michael Hogben.

Mr. Fabrikant killed them because he felt he was not getting enough support from his colleagues. If the registry had been in place at that point, I have no doubt that those four people might be alive today. For weeks, Mr. Fabrikant had walked the halls of Concordia, perhaps with a rifle, and people suspected he was dangerous man. If police had had access to a gun registry that identified him as the owner of a firearm, I doubt that those people would be dead today.

The registry has its place. The government is removing the requirement to register non-restricted firearms. It is also fearmongering. It is clashing with a large part of the public and also with the police, who are responsible for ensuring public safety. This government brags about wanting to make people safe and sending criminals to jail, yet they are depriving law enforcement authorities of a valuable tool.

Last week, the head of the Montreal police oficers' association, the Fraternité des policiers et policières, told us that of the 14 police officers killed recently, 12 were killed by long guns. The gun registry is useful. As of September 30, 2011, the Canadian gun registry was being used more than 17,000 times a day. In my riding of Gaspésie—Îles-de-la-Madeleine, police have said that they use the registry every day. Officers in the Sûreté du Québec consult the registry every time they respond to a situation such as death threats, assault, abuse and suicide attempts.

We will never be able to know the number of lives saved in the Gaspé because Sûreté du Québec or RCMP officers changed their method of intervention after consulting the registry. The Conservatives do not have a column for those figures.

What will Conservative members say to youth protection workers, paramedics and nurses? Will they apologize for putting their lives in danger as well? Likely not, since the government is dismissing their concerns like it is dismissing the opinions of victims groups, most of which continue to support the maintenance of the long gun registry. The government is adding insult to injury by destroying existing long gun registry records. This government, which was elected to represent all Canadians, is gambling with the safety of the public for partisan reasons.

As the official opposition, we have suggested other possibilities to the government. We made suggestions that would have allowed the Prime Minister and the members of his party to reach a compromise. We too want to respond to the concerns of aboriginal and rural communities, but we also want to ensure that the police have the tools they need to keep our communities safe.

In 2010, the NDP made several suggestions to alleviate the problems with the registry. Mr. Layton, who recently passed away, wanted to build bridges between urban and rural populations. He proposed decriminalizing the failure to register a firearm for first-time offenders. Previous versions of the bill allowed businesses to keep an inventory of the sale of long guns. This bill does not contain any such provisions. The government is rejecting these proposals; it prefers to pit urban Canada against rural Canada. Yet, stopping violence is a priority for both rural and urban Canadians. There is no good reason to explain the government's inflexibility.

A study by the National Institute of Public Health estimates that, in Quebec, over 2,000 lives have been saved since the implementation of the long gun registry. Furthermore, an average of one in three women who die at the hands of their husbands are shot. Most of these victims are killed with a legal shotgun or hunting rifle.

Why does the government want to reduce firearm tracking mechanisms on top of eliminating the registry? This bill also does not include any measures to ensure that firearms are transferred only to valid permit holders. The bill does not make any sense in any respect and goes against the values and requests of Canadians.

I call upon the Conservative members to regain their common sense and reverse their decision. Our future depends on it.

[Coptic Christians in Egypt, October 27th, 2011]

Mr. Speaker, I thank the member for his interventions earlier. It shows a clear interest in having a non-partisan approach to resolving issues.

I think we all agree in this House that every step we are taking toward peace in Egypt will have an impact. All of the steps the government is proposing will certainly lead us toward a solution.

There was one aspect that seemed to be omitted in his list of things with which he is willing to go forward. Back in 2008, the Conservative government in its throne speech promised it would set up a non-partisan democracy promotion agency. I am wondering how the government is planning on integrating that within its proposed solutions which it brought forward to the House today.

If we stress the non-partisan part of this series of solutions that we are proposing today, expeditious actions by the House will be much more assured. Although there are several options the government has proposed, I am curious as to why that one in particular, which is so clearly non-partisan, was omitted.

I am wondering if the member could address that particular issue and how that could be integrated within the solutions that we are looking at today toward a peaceful resolution of what is going on in Egypt.

[Ending the Long-gun Registry Act, October 27th, 2011]

Mr. Speaker, I am sorry.

I have a moral obligation to denounce the Conservative government's decisions on the issue of the gun registry. Once again, this government is forcing a bill through without any debate. The Conservative government will surely break the record for the lack of debates in the House. Not only does the Conservative government seek to avoid compromise with the large part of the public that is very concerned, it seems to worry about things that, honestly, many people do not understand.

The government is removing the requirement to register non-restricted firearms. It is also fearmongering. It is clashing with a large part of the public and also with police, who are responsible for ensuring public safety. This government brags about wanting to make people safe and sending criminals to jail, yet they are depriving law enforcement authorities of a valuable tool.

As of September 30, 2011, the Canadian gun registry was used more than 17,000 times each day. In my riding, police in the Gaspé have said that they use the registry every day. Officers in the Sûreté du Québec consult the registry every time they respond to a situation.

[Ending the Long-gun Registry Act, October 27th, 2011]

Mr. Speaker, I would like to start with some brief comments. The member for Nipissing—Timiskaming said that by passing the bill that is before us we will save $2 billion. I would very much like to understand how he is going to save $2 billion by scrapping the firearms registry. The money has already been spent and it will never come back. It is virtually an insult to tell Canadians they are going to save that much. What is going to be saved is $4 million. Four million dollars a year to save lives; I think that is worth it. Honestly, I think Canadians deserve it. Four million dollars is not too much, even if it saves only a single life. The statistics tell us there has been a significant decline in deaths and attempted murders in spousal violence situations since the firearms registry was established. The registry is working; it is saving lives.

I cannot believe that the Conservatives really want to abolish our firearms registry. The Parliament of Canada should continue to do everything it can to protect the women of this country. It should do everything it can to protect gay people and members of cultural communities. We are all affected by violent people, by acts of aggression, by violence. We have had enough.

We have the tools in front of us that can protect us, that help us and that can save lives. At a cost of $4 million a year, I honestly think it is worth it. The bill to abolish the registry today is a slap in the face to Quebeckers. Quebeckers who want the firearms registry are being told too bad, they will pay twice for the same registry. The Conservatives think that by abolishing it, they will save $2 billion dollars. That makes no sense. Quebeckers are being told tales. They are being told to believe that it is worthwhile to destroy it. But what is really being done is to make Quebeckers pay twice for a firearms registry that cost an arm and a leg, as we know.

I want to hear that Parliament is going to continue to protect people who are disadvantaged, who are hurt, who are attacked, and that it certainly does not want to abolish the firearms registry. I want to keep this registry.

I would like us to remember how the firearms registry came about. My colleague reminded us that Heidi Rathjen was very much involved in the creation of the current registry. On the evening of December 6, 1989, there was a massacre at École Polytechnique in Montreal. I was there on the evening of December 6, 1989. Fourteen women were killed when Marc Lépine went to the Université de Montréal with the intention of killing feminists. After firing into the air, he convinced all the men in the classroom to leave. Only the murderer, Lépine, and his victims remained in the classroom.

Nobody wanted to believe that the lives of these people were truly in danger, but today, we do believe it. Of the nine women he shot at in the classroom, he managed to kill six. He then went along the corridor to the cafeteria. He went to another classroom. He managed to kill 14 women in less than 20 minutes. I was there on the evening of December 6. I remember my colleagues' faces, the shock, the sadness, the anger. I remember my many colleagues, Montrealers, women, who made their way to the Polytechnique. I remember the vigil and the questions we were all asking: How? Why? What happened? Fourteen women are dead? Is it true?

Were they dead because one man felt emasculated? Since that day, everywhere in Canada, on December 6, women and all Canadians remember the acts of violence committed against women. We remember the massacre at the Polytechnique in Montreal. We remember Marc Lépine's anti-feminism. Let us remember the reason for the massacre. Marc Lépine wrote on the day of the massacre:

Know that I am committing suicide today...not for economic reasons...but rather for political reasons. I have decided to send feminists, who have done nothing but ruin my life, to their Maker—to the kingdom of the dead.

That event led to the creation of the registry we have today. Since then, there have been other massacres in Montreal. We remember Anastasia De Sousa who died from bullet wounds at Dawson College in downtown Montreal. We remember how shocked people were, and the laws that have since been passed to protect our students against men and women—especially men—who cannot help themselves and who commit acts of extreme violence. Our firearms registry is there to defend those students.

We remember Valery Fabrikant, who killed four professors at Concordia University on August 24, 1992. He was successful in killing the departmental head, Phoivos Ziogas, professors Matthew Douglas and Jaan Saber, and the professor and president of the teachers' union at Concordia University, Michael Hogben, a martyr of the union movement. Mr. Fabrikant killed those people. Why? Because he thought that they had not done enough for him.

Valery Fabrikant believed that he was being wronged by the university structure of Concordia University. He hounded the members of the staff. He tracked the members of faculty. He would stalk people at their homes and at their meetings. He would follow them in the halls and the corridors.

This man turned out to be armed and he turned out to be dangerous. If we had the registry in place at that point, I have no doubt that the police would have realized the risk all of those university professors were in.

He claimed that he was provoked. That was his defence. The man is now in jail and I hope he stays there for a very long time.

A memorial is now in place at the university commemorating that event. I want us to remember the union members who were shot dead by Valery Fabrikant and the fact that the registry may very well have helped.

Today, it is my moral duty to condemn the Harper government for what it intends to do to the firearms registry. Once again—