Roxanne James

[Public Safety, February 27th, 2015]

Mr. Speaker, Canadians do not expect parliamentarians to waste days debating schedules of when to hear from witnesses. We spent more than 10 hours in committee trying to come to some sort of an agreement. We were more accommodating. We are looking forward to more than 50 expert witnesses coming to committee to hear this.

Let me talk about one of the good measures of the bill. This is hard to believe for Canadians because they would expect that when one branch of government hears information that is pertinent to national security that it could communicate that to our national security agencies. That is not the case today. Canadians would be shocked. The bill would correct that. The NDP member needs to stop filibustering and let us get—

[Public Safety, February 27th, 2015]

Mr. Speaker, that question is absolutely false. It was the opposition party, the NDP, whose filibuster yesterday delayed the committee coming to an agreement on the number of meetings. We were more than accommodating. We finally agreed on having more than 50 witnesses come to speak on this particular legislation.

It is extremely critical. On this side of the House, we are looking forward to hearing from that expert testimony, including both the Minister of Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness and the Minister of Justice.

[Public Safety, February 27th, 2015]

Mr. Speaker, in committee we were more than accommodating to the NDP request. We are pleased to announce to all members of the House that we will hear from a slate of over 50 expert witnesses.

However, it does not surprise me for a moment that New Democrats would try to obstruct this very important legislation coming before the House. They want to stop it from committee.

This is the party that voted against the Combating Terrorism Act, an act that makes it illegal for people to travel overseas to engage in terrorism. New Democrats are fundamentally opposed to revoking passports, and they do not believe that someone should have their citizenship stripped if they commit terrorism in this country.

[Public Safety, February 27th, 2015]

Mr. Speaker, once again, we were able to get through committee yesterday after an NDP filibuster, the aim of which was to stop this legislation from even coming to committee. We will be pleased to hear from over 50 expert witnesses in this area. This bill is very clear. There are protections in this bill with respect to the very issue the NDP member is talking about. I look forward to hearing from each and every one of those witnesses.

[Public Safety, February 27th, 2015]

Mr. Speaker, after a 10-hour NDP filibuster yesterday, the committee was finally able to agree on a schedule for the study of the anti-terrorism act, 2015. On this side, we look forward to hearing from over 50 expert witnesses, including both the Minister of Public Safety and the Minister of Justice. We are ensuring that this legislation will be passed, despite the opposition by the NDP. Canadians would expect no less.

[Anti-terrorism Act, 2015, February 23rd, 2015]

Mr. Speaker, there is one thing I do agree with. The member mentioned that we should be clear-eyed and sensible, and I agree with that completely. However, earlier today in debate, the member for Saanich—Gulf Islands questioned the ability to apply the Canadian charter to our intelligence services in operating overseas. I question this, because what she is implying is that CSIS should somehow use the laws in other countries.

When we talk about some of the countries where we are tracking threats, we are talking about countries like Somalia and Iran. I do not think there is a single person in Canada who would think the laws that govern those countries and their human rights violations would somehow trump what we have here in Canada with the Canadian charter.

I would like to ask the member this. Does the member for Saanich—Gulf Islands actually believe that the laws of countries like Somalia or Iran are far better than what we have here under the Canadian charter?

[Anti-terrorism Act, 2015, February 23rd, 2015]

Mr. Speaker, the Liberals are fundamentally opposed to taking away passports from those who would travel overseas and engage in terrorist activities. In fact, the leader of the Liberal Party went as far as saying it was against Canadian values.

However, with respect to the passenger protect program, we are actually expanding the legislation so that we could issue a no-board order for someone who is suspected of travelling overseas to engage in terrorist activities. As well, there would be certain provisions with regard to terrorism, such as peace bonds. Also, judges could impose conditions, such as surrender of a passport.

My question for the member of the Liberal Party is this: does he agree with his leader that it is against Canadian values, or has he somehow come to the realization that these provisions in the bill are needed and the Liberal Party has decided to support it, or is this a section of the bill that the Liberal Party is actually against?

[Public Safety, February 20th, 2015]

Mr. Speaker, in actual fact, we have increased resources to our national security agencies by over one-third.

Just recently, this last week, we experienced more terror in the world, in Copenhagen. We have also seen attacks in Australia, recently in Paris, and of course here, on October 22. It is absolutely imperative, when we talk about legislation that is before this House, that we pass it to enable us to give the resources and tools to our security agencies to keep our national security and our citizens safe.

[Justice, February 20th, 2015]

Mr. Speaker, it is our government that brought in new, tough sentences for child exploitation. It is our government that ended the ability of child molesters to get criminal record suspensions. It is this Conservative government that introduced the tougher penalties for the child predators act.

Canadians listening today will not be fooled by the opposition parties. They know it is only this government that will protect the interests of our children and our country. It is this government that is protecting our national security as well.

[Justice, February 20th, 2015]

Mr. Speaker, I wholeheartedly reject the premise of that question. The fact is that we have not cut anything. We have actually increased funding to our security agencies by one-third.

With respect to this child exploitation coordination centre, there has been difficulty retaining and recruiting individuals to work in this field. Imagine for a moment the horrific scenes officers have to weed through. I talked a moment ago about the fact there are 200 million images. That is the issue. The Liberal member knows full well—