Debates of April 24th, 1998

Canadian Environmental Protection Act 1998

[John Duncan, Reform, Vancouver Island North, BC]

Mr. Speaker, the member is spinning so hard he is driving himself into the ground in terms of this and other legislation.

My question relates to the member's comment. He is justifying the legislation on the basis that because it was introduced during the time of the Tory administration in 1988 it has to be good. Does the member feel the same way about all legislation introduced by the previous government?

[John Herron, Progressive Conservative, Fundy Royal, NB]

Mr. Speaker, the short answer to that question is absolutely no. The fact is that the Canadian Environmental Protection Act, known as CEPA 88, was a solid piece of legislation, something that should continue on a regular basis.

[Joe Volpe, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to Minister of Health]

Mr. Speaker, it is a pleasure for me on behalf of the Minister of Health to support the opening remarks made by my colleague the Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of the Environment on Bill C-32 and to bring to this debate the perspective of the Minister of Health.

Health Canada's mission is to help the people of Canada maintain and improve their health as a colleague opposite indicated during question period. To protect and promote the health of Canadians is a federal responsibility embedded in the constitution.

The Department of Health plays an important role in the application of the Canadian Environmental Protection Act and will continue to do so under the new legislation, which bears the appropriate title of an act respecting pollution prevention and the protection of the environment and human health in order to contribute to sustainable development.

I would take this opportunity to remind members of our responsibilities under the Canadian Environmental Protection Act.

In conjunction with Environment Canada, the Department of Health conducts investigations to identify substances requiring immediate attention, it evaluates the risks presented by such contaminants, drafts regulations under the act, such as regulations on the provision of notices and the evaluation of new substances and, finally, develops national strategies to control toxic substances.

The Canadian Environmental Protection Act was and will remain a significant legislative measure for protecting public health. Other legislation generally focuses on controlling substances in products, whereas this act controls the dumping of contaminants into the environment at source throughout their production and use.

Canada's action on lead is a good example of the significant and measurable benefits to human health that environmental legislation can and does make. We have a variety of legislative means of controlling exposure to lead in Health Canada through for example the Food and Drugs Act and regulations, the Hazardous Products Act and the Pest Control Products Act. These have all played their part in reducing risks to human health.

It was only through the use of CEPA that we could control a major environmental source of exposure for the general population, lead in gasoline. Similarly, regulatory controls have been put in place under CEPA for PCBs, polychlorinated biphenyls, used in the past as insulation fluid for transformers; and dioxins and furans, polychlorinated dibenzo-p-dioxins and furans, which are toxic byproducts from the incomplete combustion of chlorinated material.

The Canadian Environmental Protection Act is an important mechanism for addressing the issue of toxic substances because of its framework for identifying, assessing and managing toxic substances. This is what Canadians want, a comprehensive approach for managing toxic substances throughout their life cycle, that is, from production, through use, to disposal.

The basis for economic progress is wealth creation. At the core of wealth creation is the contribution of knowledge, knowledge of how to transform the gifts of nature into wealth. It is essential to remember first that nature's gifts and how abundantly we have them here in Canada are not infinite. This is not a bottomless treasure trove. Second, it is salutary to remember that human development is at the core of sustainable development. One cannot have sustainable development without healthy people, a fact that we have underlined in our department's sustainable development strategy entitled “Sustaining Our Health”, tabled in parliament in December 1997.

I know my colleague who spoke a moment ago would want to take note of that as being a little different from his recollection of history and parliament at least as it relates to innovative legislation from this government.

I would like to take this opportunity, though, to remind hon. members that the preamble to the declaration on sustainable development to which Canada committed by signing agenda 21 of the Rio declaration states: “Human beings are at the centre of concern for sustainable development. They are entitled to a healthy and productive life in harmony with nature”.

It is these twin targets that the Canadian Environmental Protection Act has in its sights. It is an act respecting the protection of the environment and of human life and health. This legislation then is is intended not only to protect our environment for its own sake but it aims also to protect the environment because of its direct links with human health. These are not disparate targets but vitally linked, linked for life.

One is reminded of the saying that our fate is connected with the animals, from Rachel Carson's book Silent Spring published in the early 1960s, a book which did so much to promote the awareness of the need for environmental protection.

I know Mr. Speaker remembers the environmental movement of the 1960s. You lived through it as a young person in university. I recall your activist days at Queen's University and then later on in Toronto. You earned quite a name for yourself in this regard. I know you did not want me to draw attention to that. But in view of the fact that members opposite are interested in the activities of all members of this House prior to their presence here in this institution, I thought it would be appropriate to draw attention to the fact that you were not always a Speaker nor a member of parliament but quite an active and interested citizen of this great land.

While we are happy that movement generated your presence in this House, it is also worthy of note that the environmental movement of the 1960s culminated in the establishment in Canada of a strong federal presence on the issue with the formation of the Department of the Environment in 1972.

We have come a long way since then when a series of high profile ecological disasters worldwide spurred on the environmental movement. Our view of the issues has changed as has our means of protecting the environment.

In Canada this federal involvement began with the environmental contaminants act in the mid-1970s, legislation which seemed fine at the time. By the mid-1980s it was clear the act needed expanding and strengthening. In 1988 the Canadian Environmental Protection Act was launched.

As the cornerstone for federal environmental protection with the arrival of the 1990s it was time for the review once again of the administration of our environmental protection legislation by a parliamentary committee. I might take a moment to compliment the committee on its whole and on its individual representation for the fine work it has done over the course of this last parliament and in this current parliament in coming forward with suggestions that have been incorporated in this legislation.

I would like to express on behalf of the Minister of Health my appreciation and admiration for the work of the Standing Committee on the Environment and Sustainable Development in laying the groundwork for the bill before us today.

It became clear from the committee's review of the present act that it could be and should be enhanced in several ways to focus more on pollution prevention and so contribute in a more significant way to sustainable development and the health of future generations.

With this very concern about the future there is the need for all of us not think in terms of business as usual or development without regard costs but about what we should do now to build a sustainable future for generations to come. That makes this bill to renew and revitalize the Canadian Environmental Protection Act of critical importance as we prepare to enter the new millennium. We believe the new Canadian Environmental Protection Act is an essential tool in helping to shape the future of sustainable development.

The renewal of this act will satisfy at least two federal priorities by increasing the effectiveness of the environmental protection in Canada and by meeting the objectives of the Liberal government such as making pollution prevention a national goal and enhancing the role of the public and setting timetables for phasing out releases of those toxic substances which are of most concern.

Members will know that chemicals in one way or another are an essential part of technological development. Because of our dependence on the environment for our well-being both now and in the future, those chemicals that are assessed as toxic persisting in the environment and tending to build up in animal and human tissues must be prevented from gaining entry into the environment.

I therefore support Bill C-32 for the following reasons: its prudent approach, which consists in taking steps to avoid possible damage; its adherence to the principle of pollution prevention, which consists in taking steps to prevent contamination; its concern with reducing the overall costs associated with environmental pollution, that is to say, not just repercussions on the public's health and well-being, or its costs in financial terms, but also its impact on the cost of health care in Canada; and its science-based decision-making process.

Under the provisions of Bill C-32, the Department of Health, in conjunction with Environment Canada, will continue to assume responsibility for setting objectives and drqfting guidelines and codes of practice for the protection of human health.

In addition, and in order to respond to public concerns about the effects of pollution and toxic substances on health, the department will step up its efforts to assess and manage risks associated with new and existing chemical substances and with biotechnology products.

The federal government is increasingly aware that international action is required to address pollution from outside the country. In response to this new priority, the Department of Health will take the opportunity offered by the new bill to broaden its sphere of activity and move from a mere assessment of international atmospheric pollution to a more global assessment of international air and water pollution.

To provide comprehensive protection for Canadians in the most effective of manners, Bill C-32 complements but does not duplicate other legislation. As an illustration of this effort the federal government has included a consequential amendment to the Food and Drugs Act and regulations as part of Bill C-32. This amendment allows the Minister of Health clear authority for the first time to collect and assess information on the environmental impact of foods, drugs and medical devices under the Food and Drugs Act. To provide comprehensive protection for Canadians in the most effective manner, Bill C-32 complements but does not duplicate other legislation.

The Canada-wide accord on environmental harmonization was recently signed by the federal, territorial and most provincial environment ministers. The accord is evidence of a strong national desire to provide a co-ordinated response to environmental protection. In this context I mention the recent endorsement of the principles of co-operation on health and the environment by all levels of government which ensures a co-ordinated approach to the protection of human health from environmental contaminants.

These principles underscore the importance of environmental integrity to human health and affirm that governments in Canada are responsible for ensuring their decisions to protect the health of people and the environment for creating conditions that encourage individuals and communities to adopt sustainable practices. But we recognize that governments alone cannot solve the problems. I am encouraged by the efforts of the chemical industry which has been on the forefront of engaging in the challenge of sustainable development with its reasonable care program.

Environmental protection is an important matter for all Canadians. As we have seen in the results of recent public opinion polls, most people see issues of environmental quality largely in terms of health, their own and that of their children. They are willing to take part in protecting the environment to accomplish those goals.

In response to the recommendations of the standing committee, Bill C-32 explicitly recognizes that protecting the environment and human health is a responsibility that must be shared by all sectors of society. The present Canadian Environmental Protection Act includes participation rights. The renewed act will give the Canadian public the right to examine all phases of risk assessment and management and to provide recourse if it has reason to believe the government has failed to live up to its obligations.

Aboriginal people with their unique history and knowledge of environmental management have an important role to play. For the first time the Canadian Environmental Protection Act will include aboriginal peoples as partners in environmental protection.

Concepts such as pollution prevention and sustainable development had just emerged when the first Canadian Environmental Protection Act was drafted. It was also the case for concepts such as globalization. Today, the world is smaller. No country can live in isolation, particularly when it comes to toxic pollutants.

Canada must be ready to face the challenge of globalization. The new Canadian Environmental Protection Act will be an essential element of the federal government's strategy to take a proactive approach with environmental issues, in a global context.

The act provides a whole range of options beyond direct regulation to monitor toxic substances, and this should help us move toward an approach that better reflects the principles of sustainable development.

I provide a quote from a previous minister of health, Mr. Marc Lalonde, who did so much to promote the emphasis on preventive care in public health with his report “A New Perspective on the Health of Canadians”. He closed this report with a quotation from the Bible: “Who shall prepare for battle if the trumpet gives an uncertain sound?”

The proposed new CEPA gives a very clear and certain sound. It signals to all Canadians this government is serious and is truly committed to pollution prevention and sustainable development. Canada needs this legislation for the 21st century and beyond. I strongly urge all members to support it and I thank them for their attention.

[The Deputy Speaker]

When debate on this matter resumes there will be 10 minutes of questions and comments to the hon. member.

Police And Peace Officer National Memorial Day

[Peter MacKay, Progressive Conservative, Pictou—Antigonish—Guysborough, NS]

moved:

That, in the opinion of this House, the last Sunday of September should be formally recognized from this year forth as “The Police and Peace Officer National Memorial Day” to honour the memory of those officers killed in the line of duty.

Mr. Speaker, I am honoured and pleased to rise in the House today in support of Motion No. 342, a motion I introduced some two months ago.

As a quick recap for members present, Motion No. 342 states that in the opinion of this House, the last Sunday of September should be formally recognized from this year forth as the police and peace officer national memorial day to honour the memory of those officers killed in the line of duty.

I would like to thank the Canadian Police Association for bringing the lack of formal recognition for the memorial to my attention. As always the CPA has been a strong voice on behalf of the police officers in the street. In particular Scott Newark has assisted me in my efforts in bringing this motion forward.

In September of last year one of my first public engagements as the Progressive Conservative justice and solicitor general critic was to attend the 20th annual memorial service for police and peace officers on Parliament Hill. It was a very moving event in which thousands of people, law enforcement officers from all parts of Canada, the United States, their families and friends, participated. They gathered not only to honour the memory of their comrades or loved ones, but also to remind all Canadians of the law enforcement community's dedication to public safety, a dedication for which men and women have been willing time and time again to pay the ultimate sacrifice.

From my own perspective, it allowed me to pay personal tribute to the many police officers I had worked with during my time as a crown attorney. Their commitment and contribution to public safety and community on the front lines helped me to do my job in a more satisfactory and professional way in the courtroom.

The national memorial service for police and peace officers is a story of how a single incident can provoke something of a much grander scale.

On this day 21 years ago there was not any memorial service for law enforcement officers in Canada who had lost their lives in the line of duty. That situation changed one tragic summer night in 1977. A 21-year old rookie officer with the Ottawa-Carleton police by the name of David Kirkwood paid a professional visit to 710 Gladstone Avenue, about a 20-minute walk from Parliament Hill.

The young constable with only four months service on the force went with two other officers to serve Frederick Koepke, himself only 22 years old but with severe emotional and psychiatric problems, with two warrants for assault causing bodily harm. The three officers were met at the door with gunfire and a stand-off ensued.

While awaiting reinforcements, David Kirkwood was assigned to cover the rear of the residence where, upon attending that position, he was shot at point blank range. He died instantly on July 11, 1977 leaving behind a pregnant widow and a police force fraught with grief and sorrow. A veteran constable who served with David Kirkwood described the loss of the young officer as a death in the family.

The members of the Ottawa Police Association wanted to do more than grieve, they wanted to send a clear message to the entire country. On September 24, 1978 David Kirkwood's comrades held a service on Parliament Hill to honour his memory and remind elected officials that peace officers continue to be killed in the streets daily in the name of public safety.

The 1978 ceremony began with a two-gun salute fired by members of the 30th Field Regiment of the Royal Canadian Artillery. After the salute, one brass shell case was saved and mounted on a commemorative plaque. This plaque contained a simple yet powerful inscription: To fallen comrades, Parliament Hill, September 24, 1978.

Although Ottawa police officers continued to hold the ceremony subsequent to that year, the number of participants increased in size and scope. This memorial began to take on a more national focus.

The ceremony's evolution through the past two decades was incremental. At the 1984 service a memorial book of remembrance for police officers and correctional officers killed while on duty was unveiled by the Office of the Solicitor General and the Canadian Association of Chiefs of Police. In 1994 the Prime Minister joined with more than 700 police officers and relatives of slain officers at the site just behind these parliament buildings as the Canadian Police Association and the CACP dedicated the new Canadian police memorial pavilion.

That granite stone at the base of the pavilion contains the names of more than 200 officers killed in the line of duty since 1879. Two other stones were also erected, one for peace officers who died in the line of duty and the other explaining the pavilion's history. In 1995 the memorial honour roll was expanded to include the names of slain officers from other Canadian law enforcement agencies such as customs and excise, natural resources and fisheries and oceans.

I am proud to say that my father in his last ministerial portfolio of public works played a key role in realizing the site in the early 1990s. In fact there is a photo in my office showing my father speaking at the ground breaking ceremony.

Recently I have been advised that construction near the site has jeopardized the integrity of this pavilion. It is certainly hoped that great care will be taken.

In expanding the memorial to include peace officers the event's organizers cited the basic principle behind the annual ceremony: to pay tribute to those who have sworn an oath to protect the lives of others.

The Canadian Police Association and the Canadian Association of Chiefs of Police established three criteria to establish the names of those who should be listed in the memorial book and on the stone.

The deceased must have been a sworn police or peace officer and death must have occurred as a result of a traumatic event influenced by an external agent. The deceased must have been on duty at the time of death, or if off duty, acting in their capacity as a police or peace officer, or the death must have been brought about because of the victim's official status. Lastly, the deceased must have acted in good faith in doing all that was expected, while bearing in mind the incident, the rights of those involved and the safety of all concerned.

The names of the more than 200 Canadians displayed on this memorial, all of whom have met these extraordinary benchmarks, distinguishes the highest act of sacrifice and selflessness. So long as we add more names each year to this memorial, Canadians and their elected representatives will be challenged to do more, to strive to bring about better policy and legislation in the hope of ensuring that fewer names will be added to this gallant but tragic list.

It is most certainly time for parliamentarians to take the next step in the evolution of this memorial and to grant formal recognition to this very special occasion.

By passing Motion No. 342 parliament can send a strong message of respect and gratitude to our law enforcement officials who have made the alternate sacrifice for public safety. It would also express our collective solidarity with the families and friends who have lost loved ones, along with those men and women in the law enforcement profession who put their lives at risk each and every day.

Let us rise above the usual political fray that exists in this place and pay tribute to one of society's most demanding and important vocations. Let us accord the respect that many law enforcement officials presently feel that perhaps they do not receive from their elected officials.

Although the procedure and House affairs committee opted not to classify Motion No. 342 as votable, I would ask that all hon. members give unanimous consent to allow the motion to be voted upon in the House.

I would like to quote from a passage of the Bible which was read at last September's memorial service. It is taken from chapter 3, verses 1 to 6 of the Book of Wisdom:

But the soles of the righteous are in the hands of God, and no torment will even touch them.

In the eyes of the foolish they seemed to have died and their departure was thought to be an affliction and their going from us to be their destruction but they are at peace.

For though in the sight of men they were punished, their hope is full of immortality.

Having been disciplined a little, they will receive great good

Because God tested them and found them worthy of himself; like gold in the furnace he tried them, and like a sacrificial burnt offering he accepted them.

Sombre but telling words. I hope all members of the House will support this motion and as requested, make this motion a votable item.

[The Deputy Speaker]

Is their unanimous consent that the motion be a votable item?

[Some hon. members]

No.

[The Deputy Speaker]

There is no consent.

[Joe Volpe, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to Minister of Health]

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to speak today on the motion to designate the last Sunday in September as a national police and peace officer memorial day. I do so on my own behalf and especially on behalf of my colleague the Parliamentary Secretary to the Solicitor General and I hope on behalf of all other members on this side as well.

For the past 20 years Canadians have honoured police and peace officers in a memorial ceremony and reception for the families and colleagues of officers killed in the line of duty. That memorial takes place on the last Sunday of every September. Each year this memorial service has been conducted on Parliament Hill. It is always a well attended event. In fact it is a day when all of us set aside our differences and pay our respects to those who sacrificed their lives so that we can live safely in our communities.

Chief Thomas Welsh first introduced the service in 1978 in response to the shooting death of Ottawa Police Constable David Kirkwood in 1977. Since then Constable Kirkwood's memory is honoured each year along with others who lost their lives so suddenly and tragically.

Now in its 21st year the memorial service has had in attendance special guests such as the Governor General of Canada, numerous solicitors general, members of the fallen officers' families and police officers from around the world. It is a solemn occasion to pay tribute to the men and women who have given their lives over the years to protect all Canadians. It is an occasion for families and friends to remember their loved ones. More important it is an occasion for all of us to remember that part of the reason we live in a safe and just society is because of the dedication of police and peace officers.

Each year we hope that new names will not be added to the list of the memorial. Sadly this has not been the case. While Canadians live in one of the safest countries in the world there have been times when danger could not be avoided and when those on the front lines have lost their lives while protecting the safety of others.

Although those in law enforcement garner a great deal of respect from Canadians they are also facing unprecedented challenges.

In our current social environment there is a public perception that crime is much more prevalent than it actually is. Even though crime rates have been steadily decreasing in recent years, the perception is that crime is on the rise. Police race relations, youth gangs, violent crime, organized crime, drug trafficking, smuggling, hate crime and even fear of crime are at the forefront of the daily challenges police face across this country.

These competing demands make it even more necessary for police, our communities and government to continually look at how we can do things better and to find new ways to meet these problems directly. Responding to crime and criminal behaviour is no easy task. The very nature of police work involves some intrusive and at times aggressive interventions in order to control situations and to solve crimes. It is important to provide a fair and equitable framework for police work in legislation.

As part of this government's safe homes and safe streets agenda, we have done much in the way of improving the tools with which police are able to carry out their duties. We have worked very hard to introduce legislative reforms that strike the right balance.

In addition to the memorial tribute each year, this government continues to honour the work of peace officers across Canada by doing what we can in our capacity to provide the tools that those in law enforcement need to do their jobs as safely as possible. That means providing legislation that tackles crime head on such as the anti-gang legislation which was passed last year. It means focusing correctional resources on those who need it most. It means ensuring that we continue to live in safe homes and safe streets.

This motion speaks to the need to officially recognize a service that has taken place for over two decades. It has become a tradition we observe each year and it is clear that the families and colleagues of fallen officers count on all of us to pay tribute to the memories of those who are no longer with us. It is a time when we all pause to reflect on the contribution our police and peace officers make to our society and to honour the fallen.

A formal national memorial day such as the one proposed in this motion will serve Canadians well. Quite often it takes a ceremony of this magnitude for us to realize that our safety sometimes comes at the cost of our best and brightest peace officers.

While many of us take public safety for granted, Canada is one of the few countries in the world where we can walk in our streets and feel relatively safe.

Public safety is a priority of law enforcement for this government. This is demonstrated on a number of fronts. It means providing legislation to tackle crime head on such as the anti-gang legislation which was passed last year. It means focusing correctional resources where they will be most effective. It means taking crime prevention seriously to ensure that we will continue to live in safe homes and safe streets.

An official recognized national police and peace officers memorial day would provide Canada with a specific occasion to express our appreciation for what we have. This government is committed to taking a balanced approach to reducing crime in Canada which includes the underlying factors that lead to criminal behaviour.

The hallmark of our efforts includes close co-operation with federal, provincial and territorial governments. It is essential in order to build an effective and efficient criminal justice system.

The record on public safety speaks for itself. Since the last peace officers memorial, this government has taken steps toward making Canada a much safer place to live. First, we have introduced legislation to create Canada's first national DNA data bank so that repeat offenders can be apprehended more quickly.

Second, we have supported studies that tell us more about the nature of crime and what we can do to change the behaviour of those who commit criminal acts.

Third, we continue to work with our partners across Canada and beyond our borders to stop crime in its tracks.

Fourth, we will continue to take tough measures against violent and dangerous offenders.

Fifth, we remain committed to making improvements to the legislative foundation of Canada's correctional system, the Corrections and Conditional Release Act, where the need for change is demonstrated.

There is more to be done and this government is prepared to take on the task. In the name of public safety and for the safety of those who work each day to enforce our laws on the front lines, we will continue to build on our successes and to learn from our past.

This government supports Motion No. 342 and I am sure all members will do the same.

[Howard Hilstrom, Reform, Selkirk—Interlake, MB]

Mr. Speaker, I believe the last member speaking from the government side was from the Eglinton—Lawrence riding. I also believe that is a member who called out no when there was a request for a votable motion here today.

Listening to his comments and remarks with regard to this motion, it borders absolutely on being anti-police. It was nothing more than a self-serving discussion, a brag of what is perceived to be great accomplishments in the area of crime fighting and support for our police forces and peace officers.

This is a very important motion and I do not intend to dwell on the kind of speech I heard. The mover of this motion has devised an important motion for all of us in Canada because there is no one in this country who is not either related to a police officer, has been served by a police officer or has supported police officers as they go about trying to do their work.

As such, I can assure the member that the Reform Party totally supports his motion and that it should have been allowed to be a votable motion. A special day should be set aside for these people who serve our communities so well.

In my comments today I will not go over the slightly more technical, historical, chronological events that have occurred to bring this about. I would like to expand a bit on the human face that was put on this motion by the presenter and just expand a bit on his comments in support of him.

As members know, I am a former police officer in the Royal Canadian Mounted Police. I have attended these memorial functions, not in Ottawa here on the Hill but in other divisions, and attended the funerals of members slain on the duty days when they went to work not expecting anything unusual.

Who are these police officers who serve in front of us every day in uniform and in plain clothes? They started out as boys and girls in our high schools thinking about the occupation they would like to take up. The ones who lean toward public service, toward helping their fellow man, recognize right from wrong, these are the people who have traditionally joined police forces across this country.

I speak of all police officers and peace officers designated by the various provincial and federal statutes and who serve with every municipality, the Royal Canadian Mounted Police, the Surete, the Ontario Provincial Police.

Of course we should not forget either those members of yesteryear police forces that are no longer in existence. Those members also gave up their lives on occasion for the Canadian public and the Canadian good.

These young boys and girls graduated from high school in days past and currently graduate from university and then continue on to police work. They do not realize at the time they go into police work the full extent to which they are dealing with the most unpredictable animal on the face of the earth. That happens to be a human being.

These people go into cadet training and training at the RCMP academy full of idealism, hope and a sense of service, little expecting and little knowing what lies ahead. While they are in training they begin, through the studying of the Criminal Code and the training programs they go through where instructors start to speak of the reasons why they are hammering home self-defence and the law, to fully understand their rights and authorities in carrying out their duties.

This is done for two reasons. One is obviously so that the maximum quality of service can be given to Canadians, and the second is for the protection of those peace officers as they go about their duties.

It is certainly a concern of mine that these future members of our police forces not be lulled into a false sense of security through government propaganda about all the protection they are going to get out of Bill C-68, the Firearms Act, that they will somehow know before going into a dangerous situation, a family dispute or whatever, that so and so is not the owner of any guns or in possession of any firearms. That is not true and I sincerely hope that the trainers of these young police officers do not put forward the government's propaganda with regard to Bill C-68.

I was putting a human face on these young police officers, that first patrol when they are first assigned to their duties, whether it is walking in the tough end of a city or driving their first patrol car at night. As they pull over that first car for a spot check or attend that first alarm indicating the possibility of criminals in a building, their hands start to sweat a bit and there is a knot in their stomach. They know at that point that their safety is not guaranteed and cannot be guaranteed. Relying on their training and knowing they have in essence volunteered to put themselves on the line on behalf of the rest of us so we can sleep safely at night, they proceed along with their duties taking the best precautions possible but knowing they cannot protect against everything.

As they go through their service in the police force they end up doing specialized duties such as highway patrol duty, traffic duty. They are exposed to more dangers than just firearms, knives and being assaulted. They are subject to contamination from blood and other bodily fluids at different scenes.

When a member is killed on duty a terrible situation obviously arises for the family, and there is always family. These people need a place to go from year to year for the rest of their lives to make sure they can see their son or daughter is being recognized. Such a place is in Ottawa, such a place is in their home provinces and towns. It would be really nice if there were one day that everyone could point to as being the day that recognizes their sons' and daughters' contribution to Canada.

[Richard Marceau, Bloc, Charlesbourg, QC]

Mr. Speaker, it is a pleasure to rise in this House today to speak on the motion put forward by my colleague, the parliamentary leader of the Conservative Party.

I must say, however, that I am terribly disappointed that my colleague opposite, the hon. member for Eglinton«Lawrence, would refuse to make this motion votable and turn this into a political, partisan issue, when in fact every member of this House should support the motion.

The motion reads as follows:

That, in the opinion of this House, the last Sunday of September should be formally recognized from this year forth as “The Police and Peace Officer National Memorial Day” to honour the memory of those officers killed in the line of duty.

The Bloc Quebecois enthusiastically endorses this motion and will support it.

Society as a whole is indebted to police and peace officers for the work they do so we can live in peace and security within our families, in our homes, at work and everywhere else. Men and women have paid with their lives for this dedication to their communities, and their families too deserve our gratitude in recognition of the great sacrifice resulting from the choice made by their spouse, father, mother or child.

Everywhere in Quebec and in Canada, police and other law enforcement officers perform their duties under difficult circumstances, and we become aware of the importance of what they do only when some tragic incident wakes us up to the harsh reality of it.

On behalf of my colleagues in this House and the general public, I wish to thank all those who work tirelessly to make our society a fairer and a safer place to live.

The media report only the most spectacular tragedies, so we tend to be collectively unaware of what these law enforcement officers go through every day, as they live with the possibility that their future may be jeopardized if a seemingly routine incident turns sour on them.

I urge the government to implement the measures needed to eliminate human dramas altogether. Whole families are being torn asunder, and, as lawmakers, we have a moral obligation to ensure that social and family dramas are not repeated.

I encourage the government to take note of the motion and to support it so the will of this House may be realized. The issue is not political and therefore there is no need for speeches to promote party positions.

I am pleased to support the motion of my colleague and friend, the House leader of the Progressive Conservative Party.

[Chris Axworthy, NDP, Saskatoon—Rosetown—Biggar, SK]

Mr. Speaker, it is a pleasure to support the motion of the member for Pictou—Antigonish—Guysborough:

That, in the opinion of this House, the last Sunday of September should be formally recognized from this year forth as “The Police and Peace Officer National Memorial Day” to honour the memory of those officers killed in the line of duty.

I congratulate the member for bringing this matter forward. As we heard from the Parliamentary Secretary to Minister of Health, this matter is supported by members from the other side although they oppose making it votable. The parliamentary secretary says that the government supports the motion. He also says that there is more to be done and that the government is prepared to take on this task. Obviously the government is not prepared to take on the very modest task of voting in support of this most worthwhile motion.

From time to time police officers, firefighters and others with the job of protecting and assisting many in difficult situations, at risk or in danger, are prepared to risk their lives in doing so. They have asked not only for recognition of this sort but also for a public pension to be available to their families if they are killed in the line of duty.

That is a financial question that most members of the House would support. However it is not what is being asked today. The motion does not ask the government to provide funds. It merely asks all members of the House to have a day to recognize the most supreme sacrifice made by Canadian police and peace officers in the continuance of their duties to ensure we live in a secure and safe community. Most Canadians would find it odd to think that the government was not prepared to support what is a modest yet important provision.

The Prime Minister was involved in the 1994 ceremony in which over 700 police officers and relatives of slain officers gathered at the site behind the Parliament Buildings to dedicate the new Canadian Police Memorial Pavilion. The Prime Minister and his government were supported then in their initiative to recognize and respect those police and peace officers who had lost their lives in the line of duty. The year 1994 is not very far in the past, yet here we are five years later with the same Prime Minister and the same government not being prepared to recognize a day to honour officers who died in the line of duty. Canadians would wonder why.

The sacrifices and the risks taken by police officers in the line of duty may not be better described than by the words of dignitaries at a memorial ceremony that was held just behind the House in 1997. I will quote a couple of those dignitaries. Neal Jessop, president of the Canadian Police Association, said:

Once again we gather to honour our fallen comrades and keep faith with them and their families left behind. It is a duty most sacred of all of us within the law enforcement family and a commitment that exemplifies the bonds in our larger family.

It is a duty and commitment of all of us. He continued:

This service honours those who gave their lives in service of us all. It is also our way of ensuring that the family members of those we remember today know that they are forever in our thoughts and prayers.

This year's service stands as a stark reminder that the duties, responsibilities and risks of law enforcement are a 24 a day reality.

Vincent Murray, president of the Canadian Peace Officers' Memorial Association, said the following important words:

Today is the twentieth anniversary of the Memorial Service, a service which commemorates the great sacrifice our officers have made. They have lost their lives protecting society from the evils of violence and crime. These officers served their country with integrity, honesty and courage, well known values of the law enforcement family.

Let us now remember and honour those brave officers who gave their lives in service to their country. Let us remember them as they were, for time does not age them as it does us. They will stay forever young in memories, but we will not forget them.

Surely all of us in the House share those words and sentiments. It would not be asking very much to have the motion votable and to have this day set aside to remember peace officers.

I have a few words to say about the police service in my community of Saskatoon. I have spent time, as I am sure have many members of the House, with them in the line of duty. I have watched the tasks they have to perform and the risks they have to endure. Nobody could but be impressed by their commitment to all of us and their preparedness to take on risks in the line of duty.

It is incumbent on all of us to recognize that and to do what little part we can to make sure that they know and that the families of those who have died in the line of duty know how important Canadians regard their work, understand it, and consider with compassion the circumstance in which they find themselves having lost a loved one. It is incumbent upon us to ensure that our thanks is provided in any way we possibly can do so.

One police officer who died in the line of duty comes from outside my community of Saskatoon. His name was Brian King. He was hijacked, taken hostage and killed in the most outrageous circumstances. All in Saskatoon and indeed all in Saskatchewan remember this police officer and his family. There is a centre named after him in the town of Warman where he served with the RCMP.

It is not enough to say thanks to those police officers who have provided services to date. It is not enough to say to the families of those police officers who died that we are sorry, concerned about them, appreciate the service that was provided and understand the circumstances in which they live. It is not enough to say that and go no further.

I hope members opposite would reconsider their opposition to voting on the motion and would support it. I cannot imagine any Canadian would be opposed to this important motion except maybe a few on the Liberal benches. Surely the Parliamentary Secretary for the Minister of Health is not opposed to setting aside this day. Surely the member from Prince Island is not opposed to setting aside this day to respect and honour police officers who lost their lives in the line of duty. Surely the member for Nunavut is not opposed. Surely, if they are opposed, they would be one of four or five people in the whole country who are not prepared to come forward and support the motion.

Let me close by just asking once again if the members would reconsider and by asking for unanimous consent to make the motion votable.

[Joe Volpe, Liberal, Eglinton—Lawrence, ON]

Mr. Speaker, I rise on a point of order. My hon. colleague opposite has been in this place for such a long time that he should know his party and the parties on both sides have members on the House procedures and affairs committee that make decisions about how to deal with the motion.

While the government side supports the intent of the motion, it also respects the decisions made by the all party committee.

[The Deputy Speaker]

I do not think that is a point of order. It sounds like a point of debate to me.

In accordance with the request for unanimous consent by the hon. member for Saskatoon—Rosetown—Biggar, is there the unanimous consent of the House to make the motion votable?

[Some hon. members]

No.

[Lynn Myers, Liberal, Waterloo—Wellington, ON]

Mr. Speaker, I am very pleased to speak today in support of the motion to designate the last Sunday in September as the police and peace officer national memorial day.

Since 1978 Canadians have been afforded the opportunity to officially commemorate the memory of police and peace officers killed in the line of duty. The annual Canadian police and peace officers memorial weekend service is a solemn occasion for family colleagues and all Canadians to honour and pay tribute to the men and women whose job it is to enforce the law and to protect society.

I have attended these services and they are an occasion to honour the memory of those who did so at the price of their own lives. The participation at last year's service is testimony to the increasing respect and esteem we all have for our peace officers whether they be police, correctional people or others in law enforcement.

It is because of the work of these officers that we as Canadians live in a safe society. However we sometimes take for granted the security we enjoy and it is commemoration ceremonies such as a memorial that remind us of the courage and dedication police and peace officers display day after day.

More important, it brings us all together to thank them for a job well done. Each year we hope that new names will not be added to the list of those to remember. Unfortunately this has not yet been the case.

Despite the fact that Canadians are fortunate to live in one of the safest countries in the world, adversity is a real risk and a real danger. Peace officers are vigilant about the safety of the entire community but the safety of their own lives may be compromised as they carry out their duty. In this regard I am especially grateful for the services provided by Canadian police and peace officers.

I have firsthand knowledge about police service in Canada. I sat as a member of the Waterloo Regional Police Services for 10 years. As chairman I was intimately involved with the work of police and the police service. I certainly applaud the loyalty, the commitment, the dedication and the outstanding professionalism of not only Waterloo Regional Police but of police and peace officers across Canada wherever they may be.

The motion speaks to the need to officially endorse a national police and peace officer memorial day on the same day as what has become an unofficial tradition for the past 20 years. It is a time when we all pause to reflect on the contribution our police and peace officers make to society and to honour the fallen. In addition, it is a time when we can pay our respects to the families who have also lived with the risk that each day brings and who have been called upon in their own way to make great sacrifices.

In addition to the memorial tribute each year, the government continues to recognize the work of police and peace officers across Canada during National Police Week. Again I have been intimately involved with that.

The government also provides practical support through the provision of new and innovative tools required by law enforcement officers to carry out their duties as safely as possible.

This means passing legislation that will prevent crime as well as legislation that will tackle crime in many ways simultaneously whether it be targeting high risk offenders or putting in place special measures to deal with criminal gangs.

This government will continue to make public safety its priority. This is demonstrated on a number of fronts. For example, through our efforts to combat organized crime, to develop crime prevention initiatives, to fight drug abuse and to redefine correctional strategies. The record on public safety speaks for itself.

Since the last police and peace officers memorial this government has taken steps toward making Canada a much safer place to live. The last Sunday of every September gives us all an opportunity to appreciate the difficulties and the importance of the work of police and peace officers.

Therefore, it is my belief that to designate the last Sunday of September as the date of the memorial service for the police and peace officer national memorial would entrench our respect as Canadians for police and peace officers who protect us, sometimes at the price of their own lives.

A formal national memorial day, such as the one proposed in this motion, would serve Canadian police and peace officers. It would serve their families, their colleagues and indeed all Canadians.

This government supports Motion No. 342. I am honoured to do likewise and I urge all members to do the same.

[Chuck Cadman, Reform, Surrey North, BC]

Mr. Speaker, I would just like to make a couple of brief comments.

I rise to support Motion No. 342 brought forward by the member for Pictou—Antigonish—Guysborough. As he stated in his comments, I too attended the memorial last September on the Hill. I attended with the widow and the son of a member of the old B.C. highway patrol who was killed in the line of duty on his way to responding to a traffic incident.

I also remember some two decades ago, just after I moved into the area of Surrey, how a young RCMP constable was purposely drawn out of the police station by two people driving a car wildly. He was purposely drawn to them and was shot at point blank range as he walked up to the window of the car. These two people were convicted of first degree murder at that time and sentenced to death. The death penalty was withdrawn and, to the best of my knowledge, at least one of those persons was successful on a 745 application. However, this is not the time nor the place to debate that issue.

I think for most people in this country the most common contact with police officers is through speeding tickets and roadside breathalyzer tests. Fortunately, for most people, that is their only contact. However, I have a personal connection. Five and a half years ago there was an incident within my family and I was forced to deal with the police for about two years, on a very personal level. I saw their dedication and the honour these people work with and how diligent they are at their jobs, especially in the investigative process.

Since that time I have had many opportunities to ride along with the constables on the streets of my city, to see them work and to see what they are exposed to. I advise all members of this House and any member of the public who has a problem with the police to go out and spend a Friday or Saturday night on the streets of their community to see what policing is really all about. It is a lot more than just speeding tickets and roadside breathalyzers.

Fortunately, in most cases, police officers are not forced to put their lives on the line. They realize when they leave the house every morning to go to work that it is a possibility, but very fortunately for us and for them they do not have to always deal with it. However, occasionally they do and far too often, in my estimation, these people lose their lives and widows and families are left behind to suffer.

I speak in support of this motion because I think it is long overdue. There should be full public recognition and a recognition by this place and a day should be set aside to remember these people and what they have given for their country.

[Peter MacKay, Progressive Conservative, Pictou—Antigonish—Guysborough, NS]

Mr. Speaker, I am very encouraged by the remarks and words of support that have come from all present here today. I know as well, Mr. Speaker, that you have been very supportive of the police in your community. Again, I think this is a time and a place for us, as a House, to express our support for those in the law enforcement community.

The hon. member opposite, the Liberal secretary for the Minister of Health, spoke of crime and crime prevention as being a major priority for his government. I can certainly advise that it is a priority for all here in Parliament and in fact all Canadians.

The hon. member did take the opportunity today to talk about the government's moves toward combating this most serious problem of crime in Canada, the DNA data bank legislation still before the House which we are hopeful will include the ability of the police to taking samplings at the time of charge to ensure they have the opportunity to use this important technology in crime prevention.

The member also spoke of the anti-gang legislation and changes to the Young Offenders Act. Quite frankly, those are certainly legislative moves we support but we are yet to see and yet to have the opportunity to vote on the floor of the House to bring about the necessary changes.

We have also heard mention of ill conceived gun registry. Unfortunately I can state uncategorically we do not believe this is going to help the legal community or Canadians, nor is the continuation of section 745, as alluded to by the hon. member for Surrey North.

I reiterate the importance of an opportunity for us to rise above the fray and be unified in our support of day that would recognize those in the law enforcement community, the men and women who are daily out there on the streets willing to put their actions forward for the protection of all; not to talk about it in the way the government talks about what it will do, but these men and women are out there daily putting forward their actions, not their words, toward this cause.

I am disappointed and saddened by the position taken by the Liberal members opposite. Many of these individuals should go home to their communities and consult with police officers, look them in the eye and tell them why they were not prepared to do more than just talk about it in the House but allow this motion to be votable which would then bind them to make this happen.

This is not a vote of confidence. This is not something like they are going to face on Tuesday where the Prime Minister has decided to make this a vote of confidence. This is an opportunity for a non-partisan commitment, a commitment that everybody in the House should be quick to embrace.

In the name of conscience, good will and patience I ask members present to give unanimous consent for this motion to be made votable. I ask members to check their conscience and if they are not willing to do so they should go home to their constituents and to the police community and hang their heads in shame. This is an opportunity for us to do something right for all Canadians.

[The Deputy Speaker]

Is there unanimous consent to make the motion votable?

[Some hon. members]

No.

[The Deputy Speaker]

There is no consent.

The time provided for the consideration of Private Members' Business has now expired and the order is dropped from the order paper.

It being 2.25 p.m., the House stands adjourned until Monday at 11 a.m., pursuant to Standing Order 24(1).

(The House adjourned at 2.24 p.m.)