Madam Speaker, I rise today to speak to Bill C-3 representing the constituents of Edmonton East.
A member earlier in the House compared data bank registering to tattooing during World War II. I thought at that time it was an outrageous comparison. How could this possibly be compared to something that evil done during the war? More likely I would compare it to the simple registering we have with our social security numbers. I think that would be a more apt comparison as a reference.
Do we need to wait for another Olson before the government gets serious and insists on a sample from all persons charged with indictable offences? The legislation is based on the false idea that DNA is useful in investigating some offences, mainly sexual, but does not help others.
The fact is that offenders like Clifford Olson commit both types of offences. He was convicted of more than 80 offences before he killed his first known victim. DNA, if taken on these previous charges, would have linked him to the first victim and led to his arrest. None of the convictions were for charges that the legislation covers. They were for theft, break and enter and armed robbery. Police and victims groups favour making the legislation more inclusive, but the government does not listen to their concerns.
Samples should be retained in the same way fingerprints are kept on file, essentially forever. Samples should be taken on charge just as with fingerprints. Collections of samples should be the same for the same offences as for fingerprinting. We should obtain DNA as routinely as we obtain fingerprints.
We take blood samples in certain cases. We utilize blood samples in the case of impaired driving and other charges. We take breath samples for liquor offences. Taking breath samples is a permanent record because the result of being over in the test will go on a permanent record.
We must make the best use of this tool but the Liberal bill is unduly restrictive. It costs only $50 to $60 to get a sample into the database. This is a drop in the bucket when compared to the costs, even the estimated costs, of what the gun registration program is expected to be.
Obtaining DNA is not an onerous process and involves no real invasion of the privacy of the person. It can come from saliva or from a single hair or a drop of blood. DNA identification does not endanger privacy since the information is just a series of numbers and tells nothing about the person's health or mental capabilities.
DNA can also exonerate a person suspected of a crime. I think that point is one of the most important. It can clear those who are falsely accused. It can clear them quickly and clear the air forever. It will absolutely clear the person of having something hanging over his head of which he has been accused and the thinking that he just may possibly be guilty.
The bottom line is really the most important and it is that DNA has the potential to assist the police in their work and to save lives. It is a tool of today. It is a tool that certainly is used internationally in many countries. It is a tool as important as fingerprinting was when fingerprinting was first started and possibly is more descriptive than fingerprinting.
DNA is a tool that is useful. It is a tool police departments want. It is a tool that will be good for Canadians and I believe it is a tool that we must have now for all Canadians.