Mr. Speaker, I listened with great interest to the hon. Parliamentary Secretary to the Solicitor General of Canada. I appreciated the outline of what his government had done which he placed before the House. That was refreshing, compared to what we heard from the Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Justice who gave a strident and almost nervous response to her participation in the debate. She simply attacked our critique of the laws and the manner in which some of them were being administered.
My hon. colleague referred to 250 changes and covered them quite well. There is not a hope of the child sex tourism law being enforced, in other words stopping Canadians from travelling to another country and engaging in sex with children. This is window dressing to create the impression that they are doing something when we do not have enough money to send to Manitoba to keep it onside in the administration of the Young Offenders Act. We are to expand funding to do what for child sex tourism? It is window dressing.
We saw what the government did with the faint hope clause when thousands upon thousands of Canadians signed petitions, phoned and e-mailed members of parliament, to get rid of it completely. They did nothing. Clifford Olson was allowed a full court press with a judge and jury. We saw that happen. It is tinkering again and it is window dressing.
Where is effectiveness? Where is safety for society? Where is fair and just punishment for crimes committed?
We supported the new gang law which was moved through the House and passed a year or so ago. The chiefs of police asked us to support it because it would at least open the door to an area of legislation not before entered into by parliament, organized crime. How many individuals have been charged for belonging to a criminal organization or for such a crime? We looked at that and we saw how ineffective and how unenforceable it was.
The member touched a couple of times on our concern about and our labelling of the justice system as being in a deplorable state. When a province initiates litigation to get out from under the administration of the Young Offenders Act as Manitoba is doing because there is insufficient funding coming from the federal department to maintain its financial agreement, surely it is the greatest sign that at least in this area the administration of justice is deteriorating badly. I have never in my lifetime seen such a precedent as this one.
Could the hon. Parliamentary Secretary to the Solicitor General of Canada tell the House today whether or not his government has taken any action to keep the Manitoba government onside? He must bear in mind that when the justice minister and the justice officials appeared before the standing committee weeks ago they had nothing to offer the Manitoba government.
From that time until now has there been any agreement or offer made to keep Manitoba onside? Suddenly the province of Manitoba will not be there to administer the Young Offenders Act and the federal government will have to do something about it.
Could the hon. member tell the House anything about dealing with the crisis in Manitoba with regard to the administration of the Young Offenders Act? Could he offer anything? I would be pleased to hear what the hon. member has to offer in that area.