Mr. Speaker, I thank my hon. colleague, a former RCMP officer, for his very eloquent dissertation. I have four points to make and I would like my hon. colleague to answer them.
A person convicted for an offence can be eligible for parole after serving only one-sixth of their sentence. This appalled me when I was in jail as a correctional officer and as a physician. I thought it was ridiculous.
Does the hon. member feel that people caught trafficking or using illicit drugs while in jail should actually have more of their sentence to be served in jail rather than being eligible for parole after one-sixth, have that pushed to two-thirds of their sentence which would have a very clear punitive action against those who are wilfully using drugs while in jail?
Persons caught trafficking drugs outside have to pay the price. Does he feel our judicial system right now is enforcing the penalties that are there?
In terms of dealing with hard core drug addicts, the Geneva post-needle park experiment is perhaps the best in the world. Half these drug addicts have become integrated and productive members of society. It is the best model in the world.
There are two ways of dealing with the use of drugs in society. The first is management of the problem and the second is prevention.
I would like to know how my hon. colleague feels about calling for a national head start program that deals with children in the first eight years of life to make sure they have those basic needs met. It has been proven that it has a profound impact on decreasing child abuse and ensuring that children are in school longer, commit less crime and become integrated members of society. This motion passed in the House last year. I would like to know the member's opinion on those points.