Debates of Dec. 5th, 1997

Violence Against Women

[Eleni Bakopanos, Liberal, Ahuntsic, QC]

Mr. Speaker, tomorrow, we will remember the 14 young women who lost their lives eight years ago, at Montreal's École polytechnique.

Like all victims of crimes, these young women and their families did not ask to become involved in the legal system. This tragedy had a major bearing on several acts passed by our government, including Bill C-68 on firearms, Bill C-27 and Bill C-55, to name just a few.

This week federal-provincial-territorial meetings of justice ministers in Montreal demonstrate once again our desire to work together with our provincial counterparts to ensure that Canadian concerns on this issue and others are addressed.

I invite all my colleagues to light a candle tomorrow on the national day of remembrance and action on violence against women in memory of the 14 young women whose lives were so needlessly and violently taken away.

[Chuck Cadman, Reform, Surrey North, BC]

Mr. Speaker, tomorrow 14 families will grieve the eighth anniversary of the tragedy of l'Ecole Polytechnique. This government has been free with its rhetoric on protecting women and children, but how far have we actually come?

Last month 31 year old Tony Pitcher received a four month conditional sentence to be served at home for sexually assaulting a young girl over an extended period of time. He can go to his doctor, his dentist, his work and his counselling, all on his own.

Has anybody considered his victim? Has anybody considered the community? How does this sort of inappropriate sentencing do anything to denounce the crime and deter similar attacks?

This government's record on conditional sentencing is abysmal. Many of those opposite helped pass this into law in 1995. It was never restricted to non-violent offenders in spite of over two years of incident upon incident of violent attacks on women and children. Punishment to the offender? To be sent home.

In memory of all victims of violence, I call on this government to rectify this most serious mistake.

[Jacques Saada, Liberal, Brossard—La Prairie, QC]

Mr. Speaker, today we remember the massacre at École polytechnique. I want to point out that one of the victims, Nathalie Croteau, was a resident of Brossard, in my riding.

Since this tragic event, the federal government has taken many measures to tackle the scourge of violence, including an act to control firearms; amendments to the Criminal Code, including Bill C-27; an increase of some $30 million per year in the budgets allocated to the funding of community projects dealing with crime prevention; and, as of 1997-98, and for a period of five years, the federal government will also allocate $7 million annually to initiatives seeking to prevent family violence.

This is just a small sample of the measures being taken by the Government of Canada to eradicate this scourge. They are the result of close co-operation between a number of departments, including Justice Canada, Health Canada, and also Status of Women Canada.

While we must remember, it is also very important to act.

[Michelle Dockrill, NDP, Bras D'Or, NS]

Mr. Speaker, 8 years ago 14 women were killed at l'École Polytechnique in Montreal. I rise today to remember them and to remember other women in communities across the country who have lost their lives because of violence.

As a result of a private member's bill from former NDP MP Dawn Black, all members of this House from all parties pledged their support for making December 6 a national day of remembrance on violence against women.

Yet this week we have seen macho, angry, confrontational behaviour in this House, the kind of behaviour that members of this House pledged to end, the kind of actions not suitable in this House or any other house in Canada.

I call on all members of this House to reflect on the lives lost in Montreal and renew their commitment to end all forms of violence.

[Eugène Bellemare, Liberal, Carleton—Gloucester, ON]

Mr. Speaker, in 1991, members of the House of Commons agreed unanimously to set aside a national day to remind us of our collective duty to ensure that the right of women to a life free of any form of violence was respected.

On December 6, on the occasion of the National Day of Remembrance and Action on Violence Against Women, we recall the tragic fate of 14 young women who were assassinated in 1989 at the École polytechnique for the sole reason that they were women.

I wish to pay tribute to the courage and dignity of survivors of acts of violence and to praise the numerous defence groups, parents and friends, whose support is invaluable to the women who are victims of this terrible scourge.

We must work together to put a stop to any form of violence against women.

Firearms

[Mark Muise, Progressive Conservative, West Nova, NS]

Mr. Speaker, the government is in the process of putting the final touches on its proposed firearms registration system.

Bill C-68, in its regulation, will not accomplish the government's stated goal of reducing crime involving firearms. The national registration system, which places the onus on law-abiding gun owners, will not reduce crime, as those planning on committing crime will not register their guns.

It is estimated that more than $500 million will be spent on the implementation of the government's gun control package despite the fact that serious questions exist about the effectiveness of mandatory registration. This large sum of money will be spent with little or no impact on violent crime.

The PC party believes that changes to the Young Offenders Act, introducing DNA legislation and toughening the Criminal Code pertaining to criminal use of firearms would be much more productive.

As we pause to reflect on the tragedy of the Montreal massacre, the government should start addressing the fundamental causes of violence.

Violence Against Women

[Mac Harb, Liberal, Ottawa Centre, ON]

Mr. Speaker, today we reflect and remember all women who have lost their lives in brutal acts of violence. December 6 marks the tragic day that 14 female students were senselessly killed at l'École Polytechnique in Montreal.

As a society we all have a role to play in preventing all acts of violence. Communities across Canada will mark this day as a national day of remembrance and action on violence against women.

On behalf of my colleagues in this House, I would like to commend the many excellent organizations in my constituency and across Canada that are working to eliminate violence against women. A lot has been done, but there is still a lot more to do.

Trevor Andrew

[Scott Brison, Progressive Conservative, Kings—Hants, NS]

Mr. Speaker, Trevor Andrew of Falmouth, Nova Scotia, in my riding of Kings Hants, recently captured first place and a $50,000 U.S. cheque in a snowboarding competition in Stockholm, Sweden.

Mr. Andrew, who started skiing at age 9 and is now 18, has risen quickly in one of the world's fastest growing sports. He is a two time reigning Canadian champion and is a World Cup Champion.

As of November 5, he was ranked by the Federation International de Ski as third in the world. Mr. Andrew is also likely to be a competitor in the 1998 Winter Olympics where snowboarding will debuted for the first time in an Olympic event.

We pay tribute today to Trevor Andrew, a passholder at Ski Martock in Windsor, Nova Scotia. Trevor is a pioneer in his sport and we extend every best wish to his family and to this outstanding Canadian and Nova Scotian who is providing exemplary representation for Canada around the world.

Taxation

[Jim Hart, Reform, Okanagan—Coquihalla, BC]

Mr. Speaker, Canadians are fed up with the high taxes they pay. They are also fed up with the fact that their disposable income has gone down under this Liberal government.

Can the finance minister tell Canadians today when their taxes are going to come down?

[Paul Martin, Liberal, Minister of Finance]

Mr. Speaker, they have already come down. In fact, the Minister of Human Resources announced a week ago that the employment insurance premiums would be cut by $1.4 billion. In the 1997 budget we brought taxes down by more than $2 billion over three years, helping students and the physically disabled. At the same time, we put more money in the hands of those families with children.

The issue really is, why did the Reform Party oppose those reductions in taxes?

[Jim Hart, Reform, Okanagan—Coquihalla, BC]

Mr. Speaker, a recent poll shows today that the Canadian public are not going to buy the arrogance of this Liberal government. The finance minister said he helped. Well, let's take a look; 86 months of unemployment rates above 9%, all time record bankruptcies in Canada, the worst record since the dirty thirties under this Liberal government.

I ask the finance minister again, when will the government give Canadians tax breaks?

[Paul Martin, Liberal, Minister of Finance]

Mr. Speaker, perhaps the hon. member should have looked at this morning's news. He wants to talk about employment. The fact is that there were 34,000 new jobs created last month.

There are members on that side of the table who talked about one million jobs being created some time before the year 2000. I am glad to announce that since this government has taken office, over one million new jobs have been created.

[Jim Hart, Reform, Okanagan—Coquihalla, BC]

Mr. Speaker, I do not buy the finance minister's line and neither do Canadians. If he had read the news this morning, he would have found that Canadians clearly understand the relationship between high Liberal taxes and job creation in this country. Canadians know that high taxes kill jobs.

I will again ask the finance minister on behalf of all Canadians, when are we going to get the tax cuts that we want and need for this economy to grow?

[Paul Martin, Liberal, Minister of Finance]

Mr. Speaker, it is quite obvious that having to ask three questions strains this member's capacity.

The fact is that I have already answered both of those questions. We brought taxes down and the Reform Party opposed it. The Canadian economy has produced over a million new jobs, 34,000 last month. That is a record we are proud to stand behind.

[Rob Anders, Reform, Calgary West, AB]

Mr. Speaker, last night the Liberal grinch stole all the hope of Christmas cheer from Canadians. Late last night the Liberal government legislated the largest tax grab in Canadian history, a 73% jump in CPP payroll taxes. It will start the second that Canadians shout “Happy New Year.”

Will one of the Liberal grinches please explain to Canadians why their opinion is not important? Why will they not give them the tax relief we want for Christmas?

[Paul Martin, Liberal, Minister of Finance]

Mr. Speaker, the increase in Canada pension plan premiums is money that is going into the investment savings of Canadians on the one hand and, on the other hand, to make up for the $600 million liability.

If the hon. member is against a tax increase, would he please explain it to the member for Calgary—Nose Hill who was calling for a 25% increase in personal income taxes in order to make up that liability.

[Rob Anders, Reform, Calgary West, AB]

Mr. Speaker, the prime minister, a leadership rival to the finance minister, said to Southam News that he does not care that Canadians want tax cuts. He is Father Christmas and he knows that balance is best for the good little Canadian boys and girls. How balanced is a $10 billion cash grab in the dead of night?

Working Canadians are not naive little children. We want tax cuts and we want them now.

Why will the Prime Minister not stop playing the grinch, taking and taking from Canadians, and give us the tax relief we need?

[Paul Martin, Liberal, Minister of Finance]

Mr. Speaker, the member talks about $10 billion. We had better understand where the $10 billion came from. The $10 billion is out of the Reform Party program. It is a $3 billion cut in equalization payments imposed on the citizens of Manitoba and Saskatchewan. It is a $3 billion cut in old age pensions. That comes directly out of the taxpayers' budget. It is a $3.5 billion cut in equalization payments for health care and education.

That is the Reform Party program. That is where the $10 billion comes from.

Why do they not stand up and defend the fact that they would—

Calgary Declaration

[Pierre Brien, Bloc, Témiscamingue, QC]

Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs.

Yesterday, the Liberal party was happily endorsing the mock consultations to be carried out by the Reform Party in Quebec on the Calgary declaration. Outside the House, the Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs admitted that these consultations could lead to some confusion over the significance of the Calgary declaration.

Will the minister now admit that the Calgary declaration is completely confusing and divisive, because everyone wants a piece of the pie: the Reform Party, native groups, francophones outside Quebec and now even the Saskatchewan Party?

[Stéphane Dion, Liberal, President of the Queen's Privy Council for Canada and Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs]

Mr. Speaker, it is quite interesting to see how worried the Bloc and the PQ government are about the Calgary declaration.

In fact, it shows just how many values Canadians, Quebeckers and other Canadians have in common. The fact that they are able to agree on the basis of these values shows that we do not have to separate and that we should stay together.

[Pierre Brien, Bloc, Témiscamingue, QC]

Mr. Speaker, now that the minister has finally admitted to journalists the confusion surrounding the Calgary declaration, he is surely able to enlighten us about another confusing thing.

Will he admit that there is confusion between his position and that of Reformers, because, on the one hand, the minister wants to constitutionalize the unique character of Quebec, and, on the other, the Leader of the Reform Party is asking his members to oppose anything to do with a distinct society clause?

[Stéphane Dion, Liberal, President of the Queen's Privy Council for Canada and Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs]

Mr. Speaker, as I said yesterday, our disagreement was about the notion of special status. The Calgary declaration makes it clear that this is not special status.

But, since we are talking about confusion, take the 1995 referendum question.

[Some hon. members]

Oh, oh.

[Stéphane Dion, Liberal, Saint-Laurent—Cartierville, QC]

This question mentioned an agreement and 43% of voters did not know what agreement was being referred to. It was the agreement between the three parties, signed by those parties. Only 10% of voters were aware of the existence of the bill mentioned in the question and, finally, 49% of those who voted yes thought that Quebec would become sovereign—

[Some hon. members]

Oh, oh.