Mr. Speaker, it is truly a pleasure to speak in response to my learned friends. I thank in particular the parliamentary secretary and the members for Scarborough East, Laval Centre, Beauséjour—Petitcodiac, and Surrey North.
The last statement made by my hon. friend opposite spoke of open endedness. What is truly open ended is the justice minister's promise to table legislation. It has been open ended and we have not seen it yet.
This is not an open-ended motion. This is a motion that would suggest a 50:50 share. That is equitable. That is split down the middle. There is nothing open ended about it.
My learned friend from Laval Centre spoke of Quebec's success in dealing with youth crime and youth crime initiatives. I do commend her province for that. The member indicated that it is an example that other places, mainly Canada, can learn from. I agree with that. I think we can learn a lot from the different provinces and the approaches they have taken.
The point is that the funding and commitment made by the federal government in its initial commitment to youth justice are not being held up. The government is not holding up its end of the bargain.
In particular, there was a comment made by the parliamentary secretary with respect to the current funding and commitment from this government.
I was left with the impression that she was indicating that if the provincial government received more money from the federal government, somehow this would result in higher incarceration rates. That is absurd.
What is so absurd about it is that at the same time the parliamentary secretary speaks of youth justice initiatives such things as restorative justice and alternative dispute resolution need to be funded. More funding does not simply mean more incarceration. The provinces have to exercise that discretion, but that was the impression left.
We are talking about the federal government simply holding up its end of the bargain. One would expect that the government would at least feel a twinge of moral obligation to increase its share of the young offender programs. Morality and the Liberal government seem to be mutually exclusive on this point.
The underlying issue in Motion No. 508 as with any policy area affecting federal-provincial relations is the Liberal view of government. Federal Liberals profess to have an unparalleled understanding of what is best for the country as a whole. They have a very sanctimonious and arrogant view of what is best for the country and how best to spend the country's money.
When it comes to taxpayers money no one can tell anybody the Liberal government has a great track record. As we witnessed in the social union negotiations, the federal Liberals painted the provinces as somehow the enemy of health care and social spending. We have seen successive budgets. We have seen the education budget. We have seen the health care budget. One would hope that someday we might see a justice budget coming from the government.
Conditional sentences, child pornography inaction, gutting the organized crime budget of the RCMP and the doomed false hope Firearms Act are all questionable Liberal priority performances on justice issues. Such sweeping generalizations from the government toward the provinces, characterizing them as such, is very irresponsible. Provincial and territorial governments are not the inherent enemies of co-ordinated national policy efforts. They want all levels of government to work their best and in this case work their best to address the problems in our youth justice system.
In our federation the federal, provincial and territorial governments must work together as partners, not competitors. The provinces want to be included in the decisions. They want the federal government to simply hold up and pay in its amount. They want the federal government to honour its commitments. Above all, they would like just a little respect from the federal government.
Motion No. 508 allows the Liberals to reverse the reputation they have earned over the years in federal-provincial relations. It allows them to tangibly demonstrate they are committed not just to changing youth crime legislation but to ensuring the law will be adequate.
As I mentioned at the outset, laws are only as effective as the ability to enforce them. The Minister of Justice and the Liberal government can acquire much needed credibility in renewing their efforts and their commitment to the youth justice system by increasing the federal share of the young offenders program.
As this is my final word on the matter in a final desperate attempt to bring the matter forward, I would ask that there be unanimous consent given to make this matter a votable item.