Roxanne James

[Public Safety and National Security, April 30th, 2014]

Mr. Speaker, the reason I brought forward these amendments to correct the drafting error was to ensure that, when a test was done to see whether there was any concern for public safety with regard to the offender in question or someone who works for Correctional Service Canada, the chairperson of the Parole Board of Canada would in fact disclose that information. Again, I would like to thank the member for that question and for the opportunity today to bring forward these amendments.

[Public Safety and National Security, April 30th, 2014]

Mr. Speaker, I assure the member that there is absolutely no conflict with the victims bill of rights. In fact, the member who introduced this bill has done it in connection to his view that victims of crime should actually have a better place within our justice system and have more of a say when it comes to the Parole Board hearings.

Again, I support the private member's bill, and I thank the member for his question, which allowed me to clarify.

[Public Safety and National Security, April 30th, 2014]

Mr. Speaker, we also brought in a number of changes to strengthen the parole process and help victims through the Safe Streets and Communities Act, which was passed into law in March 2012.

In the most recent Speech from the Throne, we outlined our intent to bring forward further measures to ensure that public safety would come first and victims' voices would be heard. This includes introducing the victims bill of rights act which would restore victims to their rightful place at the heart of our justice system.

Through these steps and others, we will continue to fill our commitment to Canadians that we will help victims of crime overcome the trauma they have experienced and that we will give them access to information they need and ensure that they are part of the parole hearing process. We want to ensure that victims are not falling through the cracks of the criminal justice system. That is precisely what Bill C-479 aims to do.

I would like to take a moment at this time to thank the hon. member for Ancaster—Dundas—Flamborough—Westdale for his tireless dedication to helping victims of crime in our country. With this private member's bill, the hon. member continues his quest to ensure that victims do not feel marginalized and that they do not feel re-victimized by the criminal justice system. Our government is proud to stand behind the member and his efforts and I hope to hear strong support from all members of the House on the bill.

We have heard how Bill C-479 proposes to modify parole and detention review dates as well as to provide additional support to victims of violent crime. By increasing the review period between legislated parole and detention reviews for offenders sentenced for violent offences, Bill C-479 aims to ensure a more reasonable length of time has elapsed before the Parole Board must undertake another review.

For example, instead of having to review parole within two years, the Parole Board would now have up to five years. What this means is it allows the victims who are choosing to hear the actual Parole Board hearings not be re-victimized. They do not have to relive their emotional pain every two years. By proposing to give victims additional information and increase their involvement in the parole process, the bill aims to empower victims of violent crime by increasing their understanding of the process and giving them a stronger role.

I am very pleased that this legislation received support through the committee and we reached agreement on some important amendments that further strengthened the bill. This includes a number of technical amendments to clarify the language and ensure that it can be implemented in an effective manner.

During study by committee, we introduced important amendments to the bill to address public safety concerns and ensured that victims were provided key information in a timely fashion.

In terms of public safety concerns, the bill was originally drafted to provide for mandatory release of information regarding date and time, conditions and locations of an offender's conditional release. However, and I think all members in the House would agree, there are circumstances in which disclosing the destination of an offender on release may expose front-line correctional officers to potentially dangerous situations.

To account for such situations, we introduced amendments to the bill to say that the disclosure of this information would only occur when it was clear to the chairperson of the Parole Board of Canada that there would be no negative impact on public safety.

However, there was an error in the drafting of the motion to amend the bill. The amendment adopted at committee stated that the disclosure of an offender's date, location and conditions of the release to the victim under section 142 of the Corrections and Conditional Release Act must occur subject to a public safety test. The amendment, as drafted, inadvertently overwrote clauses 6(2) and 6(3) of Bill C-479. These two clauses deleted paragraphs from the discretionary section of the provision.

The result of this drafting error was that the disclosure of this information would continue to be at the discretion of the chairperson of the Parole Board, as well as mandatory following a public safety test. As such, I have introduced amendments to correct the drafting error to ensure that disclosure of this important information will not be left solely to the chairperson's discretion.

We also introduced amendments at committee to specify that the date, location and conditions of a prisoner's release would be disclosed to victims within 14 days before the offender's release, where practical. We specified that this would only occur where practical because in some cases these details might not be fully arranged two weeks before the actual release.

We amended Bill C-479 at committee to ensure that we did not place the Parole Board in a position where it would not be able to comply with the law in cases that were obviously outside of its control. However, in drafting the motion to amend this paragraph in Bill C-479, the notation of the amendment was incorrect. Where we specified the items to be disclosed, we referred to paragraph 142(1)(a), and we should have referenced paragraph 142(1)(c). The amendments I have introduced would correct that error and ensure that this requirement, where feasible, would operate effectively for timely disclosure of date, location, and conditions of release.

In summary, I have introduced these amendments to correct drafting errors. My amendments that we are considering today, when combined with the amendments adopted by the committee, would allow Bill C-479 to make our justice system more just, unbiased, and equitable for victims. Ultimately we would ensure more fairness for victims of crime.

I would like to ask all members of this House to support my amendments to correct drafting errors.

[Public Safety and National Security, April 30th, 2014]

Mr. Speaker, I just started. It is a 10-minute speech, and I will certainly get there.

As I was saying, we knew that we had to move forward with comprehensive legislative changes and create policies and programs that would help victims of crime rebuild their lives.

Using a comprehensive approach, we have accomplished a great deal in a very few short years, including targeted investments of more than $120 million in crime prevention and victim services.

We have also changed laws to support victims. For example, we have strengthened the national sex offender registry and introduced Bill C-26, the tougher penalties for child predators act, which will better protect children from sexual offences and exploitation both here in Canada and abroad.

[Public Safety and National Security, April 30th, 2014]

moved:

Motion No. 1

That Bill C-479, in Clause 6, be amended by

(a) replacing line 9 on page 5 with the following:

“6. (1) Subparagraph 142(1)(b)(iii) of the Act is repealed.

(2) Subparagraphs 142(1)(b)(v) and (vi) of the Act are repealed.

(3) Paragraph 142(1)(b) of the Act is”

(b) replacing line 18 on page 5 with the following:

“(4) Subsection 142(1) of the Act is”

(c) replacing line 1 on page 6 with the following:

“(5) Section 142 of the Act is amended by”

(d) replacing lines 4 and 5 on page 6 with the following:

“information referred to in paragraph (1)(c) at least 14 days, where”.

Mr. Speaker, I rise to speak about an issue that is close to my heart and the hearts of all Canadians, fairness for victims of crime.

When our Conservative government first came into power in 2006, we made a commitment to take a long, hard look at our criminal justice system to see if it was fair to victims. We knew that we had to move forward with comprehensive legislative changes—

[Business of Supply, April 1st, 2014]

Mr. Speaker, my hon. colleague, the parliamentary secretary, has already addressed that concern and indicated that those who have travelled with the Prime Minister and the Prime Minister have in all cases reimbursed the Canadian taxpayer for the commercial cost of that flight.

However, in regard to the security of our Prime Minister and of this country, I will take the opportunity to speak about the serious threat that we have here in Canada. Canada is not immune to the threat of radical-led terrorism. We only need to look to recent headlines in the papers with regard to people who have gone overseas for radicalized training to assist other countries in their wars and have come back to Canada. We need to think just recently about the VIA Rail plot and of the Toronto 18 group.

We have to take security seriously. We have to ensure that our Prime Minister's safety and security are foremost and paramount to this country. He represents this country. We need to keep our national borders and our country safe from all types of radicalization. Most Canadians know that they can count on this Conservative government to do just that.

[Business of Supply, April 1st, 2014]

Where do we begin, Mr. Speaker? Is it a breach of trust? Is the member kidding me?

Mr. Speaker, that member has brought up issues when the leader of his own party has to appear before the procedure and House affairs committee about concerns that the NDP has violated the rules of the Board of Internal Economy.

I just want to make clear that the NDP has admitted that it is running an office in Montreal that is partially funded by the House of Commons budget for MPs' offices and the opposition leader's office. This is clearly in violation of the rules. Because of that, the leader of the NDP now has to appear before the procedure and House affairs committee. These activities violate the Board of Internal Economy guidelines that members of Parliament cannot use their budgets to fund activities related to the administration, organization, and internal communications of a political party.

When we talk about ethics, when we talk about where we begin, I think we should begin with the NDP.

[Business of Supply, April 1st, 2014]

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to stand in the House today to oppose the motion put forward by the member for Timmins—James Bay.

Our Conservative government has strongly and consistently stood up for protecting taxpayers. That is why we have reduced the use of the Challenger for the Prime Minister and members of his cabinet by nearly 75%. However, that said, unlike the NDP and the member for Timmins—James Bay, our government is responsible and lives in the reality that Canada is not immune from the threat of radical-led terrorism.

As we recently saw from the good work done by the Royal Canadian Mounted Police, the Canadian Security Intelligence Service, the Canada Border Services Agency, and other law enforcement partners as part of Project SMOOTH, there are those who wish to harm law-abiding Canadians to further their radical political and social agenda. Two individuals plotted to destroy a train bridge near Niagara Falls as part of an al Qaeda-inspired plot. If this is not a reality check that our country needs to take national security seriously, then nothing is.

That is why, when it comes to national security, we listen to the security assessments of the RCMP.

The RCMP handles the protection of the Prime Minister. The RCMP's National Division Protective Operations provides domestic and international protective services to the Prime Minister and the Governor General and their families. It also provides protective services within the national capital region to ministers of the crown, Supreme Court justices, the diplomatic community, internationally protected persons, and others designated by the Minister of Public Safety as requiring protection.

Additionally, the RCMP's National Division Protective Operations is responsible for the protection of designated federal properties, such as Parliament Hill grounds, the Supreme Court building, Rideau Hall, and the Prime Minister's residences, and for running the NCR command centre for safeguarding the public's safety during various events. With few exceptions, I am pleased to say that there have been very few security incidents.

Wherever the Prime Minister travels, the RCMP works to ensure that he and his family are kept safe and secure. Most Canadians would agree that it is an extremely important thing to do. This is not a perk, and this is certainly not a luxury. This is most certainly not an abuse of taxpayers' dollars. This is the reality of living in a world in which certain radicalized individuals want to cause harm to Canadians, to our government, and to our way of life.

The RCMP has rightly assessed that the Prime Minister cannot and should not travel on commercial aircraft. I would be hard pressed to find many Canadians who think that he should. I am not a law enforcement professional, but neither is the member for Timmins—James Bay, and I will take the assessment of the RCMP to heart regarding what is and is not safe.

It is abundantly clear that the NDP is simply not ready to be trusted to govern this country. That party does not treat serious issues with the gravity they deserve.

Securing the Prime Minister is not a partisan interest. It is in Canadians' interest. Should a serious incident arise involving the Prime Minister, there would be serious economic implications and a great impact on this country.

We should not be surprised that the NDP is the same party that voted against the Combating Terrorism Act, which made it a criminal offence to go overseas to engage in terrorist acts or to receive terrorist training. It also opposed our new tools in economic action plan 2014 to combat terrorism financing.

Those members even voted against the Faster Removal of Foreign Criminals Act, which gives more tools to our front-line border security guards to remove people from this country who are here illegally. They even voted against combatting human smuggling, which is very often a key fundraiser for terrorist groups.

When it comes to national security, Canadians know that the NDP has quite a laughable record on the issue. Only our Conservative government can be trusted. That is why we take the necessary action to protect the Prime Minister and to protect this country, and we take it on the advice of the RCMP. That is why we have also created the Wanted by the CBSA list, which helps to remove dangerous and violent criminals from Canada. Again, they are those who are in this country illegally. We have also increased the number of front-line border security guards by 26%.

Our government also created Canada's first counterterrorism strategy and cybersecurity strategy. That is why we have invested nearly a quarter of a billion dollars to protecting Canadians from hacking and cyberespionage.

The facts are clear. We have removed over 115,000 illegal immigrants since being elected in 2006. While the member for Timmins—James Bay plays partisan political games, it is our Conservative government that is focused on the real issues that matter to Canadians.

While our government is creating jobs, growth, and long-term prosperity, the member for Timmins—James Bay is trying to take operational control away from the RCMP and away from those who work on the front lines keeping Canadians safe from national security threats. We are not just talking about the Prime Minister here. We are talking about all Canadians.

We will take no lessons from the NDP on important national security issues, such as the proper protection of our Prime Minister. In fact, there is very little the NDP has to contribute on this serious issue. This is the party whose leader bought into conspiracy theories that doubted the death Osama bin Laden. This is the party that has two deputy leaders, the members for Vancouver East and Halifax, who have content on their websites advocating offensive conspiracy theories that blame the United States, the United States of America, its government, for the horrific tragedy of September 11. This is the party whose member for Rosemont—La Petite-Patrie said that the First World War was “a war between the bourgeois who wanted to make more money”.

We all know that the NDP will never be serious on issues of national security. That is why it brings forward motions like this that seek to insert the NDP members into the process for which the RCMP employs experts. Rather than playing politics, our RCMP will give our front-line police officers the tools they need to do their jobs. We will give them the respect they deserve when they provide that advice, and we will not interfere on operational matters.

Let us look at the facts. Canada has a world-leading economy. We have created a million jobs since the end of the recession. We must operate within the bounds of the current reality in the area of national security.

It is simply a fact of life that we must take steps to secure our leaders and our country, regardless of political stripe. That is why we are opposing the motion brought forward by the NDP member for Timmins—James Bay.

[Privacy, March 28th, 2014]

Mr. Speaker, again, the same answer is going to be provided for the same question.

Of course, the Canadian government is concerned about the privacy of all Canadians. We take it extremely seriously and, at all times, all law enforcement and security agencies within Canadian jurisdiction abide by the law in all respects.

[Privacy, March 28th, 2014]

Mr. Speaker, I would like to assure all Canadians that our government takes the privacy of law-abiding Canadians seriously. At all times, law enforcement agencies comply with Canadian law regarding receiving any type of information. For the record, we will take no lessons from the NDP.