Debates of May 25th, 1999

Petitions

[Marlene Jennings, Liberal, Notre-Dame-de-Grâce—Lachine, QC]

Mr. Speaker, this petition calls on parliament to enact an immediate moratorium on the cosmetic use of chemical pesticides until such time as their use has been scientifically proven to be safe and the long term consequences of their application known.

[Werner Schmidt, Reform, Kelowna, BC]

Mr. Speaker, the petitioners from Kelowna, Westbank, Peachland, Surrey and Vernon pray and request that parliament for a number of reasons reject the Nisga'a treaty.

[Guy St-Julien, Liberal, Abitibi, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I would like to table a petition from the Inuit community of Kuujjuaq in Nunavik.

According to the petitioners, there are 16 to 20 people living in three bedroom dwellings in the winter. The Inuit find the housing conditions in Nunavik extremely distressing. They consider the situation totally intolerable. It contributes to the high incidence of the tuberculosis, infectious deseases and social problems.

The federal government must assume its obligations on housing under the James Bay and Northern Quebec Agreement.

[Nelson Riis, NDP, Kamloops, BC]

Mr. Speaker, it is an honour to present a petition pursuant to Standing Order 36 on behalf of quite a number of constituents from the greater Kamloops area.

The petitioners point out the concern Canadians have regarding violent crime and violence on our streets. Polls indicate that 90% of Canadians do not believe stricter gun control laws will actually prevent more violent crimes. The petitioners point out a number of studies which show that while violence has been a problem, stricter gun control laws have been ineffective in changing anything. The petitioners also point out that in 1997 the RCMP investigated over 88,000 cases regarding violent crimes and only .08% involved the use of firearms.

The petitioners are suggesting that Bill C-68 which is obviously costing hundreds of millions of dollars is a wasted piece of legislation and the government should be doing a number of other things which they articulate in terms of more effective ways to fight crime.

[Ted White, Reform, North Vancouver, BC]

Mr. Speaker, the first petition I am presenting is on behalf of some constituents of my colleague the hon. member for Kootenay—Boundary—Okanagan.

Mr. Hans Karlow and 29 others of Oliver, B.C. have drawn the House's attention to their concerns about the Cassini space mission. The plans are to execute a slingshot manoeuvre around the earth to give the spaceship the speed necessary for its trip to Saturn, but the spaceship has onboard 72.3 pounds of plutonium. The petitioners are concerned about the high risk of an incident which would expose the earth to catastrophic radioactive fallout.

The petitioners call upon parliament to support the UN General Assembly resolution as outlined in an emergency resolution of February 24, 1999 CRC.

[Ted White, Reform, North Vancouver, BC]

Mr. Speaker, this petition is on behalf of my constituent Bryan Thirsk and 81 other constituents from North Vancouver who are concerned about the child pornography ruling that came out recently in B.C. They are petitioning the House to do all things necessary to rectify the problem by legislation instead of allowing it to persist. Mr. Thirsk gave me this petition because he had previously sent it to the minister asking for it to be presented and that has not been done.

[Colleen Beaumier, Liberal, Brampton West—Mississauga, ON]

Mr. Speaker, recognizing the valuable assets that immigrants have brought in the past and continue to bring to Canada, the petitioners request that landing fees and processing fees for immigrants be combined to total not more than $500.

[Derek Lee, Liberal, Scarborough—Rouge River, ON]

Mr. Speaker, I have a petition with over 1,000 signatories. They call upon parliament to ask the Department of Citizenship and Immigration to review the existing income requirements for sponsored immigration applications. They also request that more than one person be allowed to sponsor the same individual and share the responsibility of financial support for that immigrant.

[John Harvard, Liberal, Charleswood—Assiniboine, MB]

Mr. Speaker, I have two petitions. The first one is signed by 687 fellow Manitobans who ask that the goods and services tax be exempt on all funeral expenses.

[John Harvard, Liberal, Charleswood—Assiniboine, MB]

Mr. Speaker, the second petition is signed by more than four dozen residents of Manitoba. They are opposed to the sale of Candu nuclear reactors to Turkey for two reasons. They point out that the country is politically unstable and it is prone to frequent and at times very severe earthquakes.

[Roy H. Bailey, Reform, Souris—Moose Mountain, SK]

Mr. Speaker, I am very pleased to present a number of petitions today from every corner of my constituency. These petitioners pray that the government take all measures necessary to ensure that possession of child pornography remains a serious criminal offence and that federal police forces be directed to give priority to enforcing this law for the protection of our children.

[John Finlay, Liberal, Oxford, ON]

Mr. Speaker, I have a petition signed by 58 residents of Canada who draw the attention of the House of Commons to the following. Rural route mail carriers often earn less than the minimum wage and in working conditions reminiscent of another era. Subsection 13(5) of the Canada Post Corporation Act prohibits RRMCs from having collective bargaining rights. This denial of basic rights helps Canada Post keep the wages and working conditions of RRMCs at an unfair level and discriminates against rural workers. Therefore the petitioners call upon parliament to repeal subsection 13(5) of the Canada Post Corporation Act.

[Paul Szabo, Liberal, Mississauga South, ON]

Mr. Speaker, pursuant to Standing Order 36, I am pleased to present a petition for the 50th time signed by a number of Canadians including from my own riding of Mississauga South.

The petitioners draw to the attention of the House that human rights abuses continue to be rampant around the world in countries such as Indonesia and Kosovo. They also acknowledge that Canada continues to be recognized as the champion of internationally recognized human rights. Therefore the petitioners call upon the Government of Canada certainly to continue to speak out against human rights abuses and also to seek to bring to justice those responsible for such abuses.

[Peter Adams, Liberal, Peterborough, ON]

Mr. Speaker, I rise on a point of order. I would be grateful if you would seek unanimous consent to return to presenting reports from committees.

[The Speaker]

Is there unanimous consent?

[Some hon. members]

Agreed.

Committees Of The House

[John Maloney, Liberal, Erie—Lincoln, ON]

Mr. Speaker, I have the honour to present in both official languages the 21st report of the Standing Committee on Justice and Human Rights.

In accordance with Standing Order 68(4)(a) and its order of reference dated Thursday, October 30, 1997, the Standing Committee on Justice and Human Rights was instructed to prepare and bring in a bill to amend those sections of the Criminal Code that dealt with impaired driving in order to enhance deterrence and ensure that the penalties reflect the seriousness of the offence.

The committee held hearings in Ottawa where witnesses and participants were broadly representative of those affected by, interested in and involved with the criminal justice system. These witnesses came from all parts of Canada.

Your committee adopted the report with 17 recommendations and also submits in accordance with Standing Order 68(5) the recommendations regarding legislative wording in the form of a draft bill.

Further, pursuant to Standing Order 109, the committee requests a comprehensive response to this report within 150 days.

Questions On The Order Paper

[Peter Adams, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to Leader of the Government in the House of Commons]

Mr. Speaker, we will be answering Question No. 169 today. .[Text]

Question No. 169—

[Garry Breitkreuz, Reform, Yorkton—Melville, SK]

For each of the past five years: ( a ) how many gun smugglers and illegal gun traffickers have been (i) identified, (ii) prosecuted and (iii) convicted in Canada; ( b ) in each case, how many illegally-possessed firearms were recovered; ( c ) in each case, how many of these firearms were categorized as either prohibited, restricted or unrestricted; ( d ) in each case, how many of these firearms were previously registered; and ( e ) in each case, prior to the offence, how many of these individuals had ever applied for or registered a firearm?

[Peter Adams, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to Leader of the Government in the House of Commons]

I am informed as follows:

Justice Canada: Data pertaining to the number of gun smugglers and illegal gun traffickers who have been identified, prosecuted and convicted in Canada, the number and categories of recovered illegally-possessed firearms, as well as the registration related information are not available from the police and law enforcement community.

To date, smuggling is an offence under the Customs Act. The enforcement of this act and seizure of firearms pursuant to it falls exclusively under the jurisdiction of Revenue Canada, Customs and the RCMP, Customs and Excise Division. This provision under the Customs Act is not specific to firearms, it includes all commodities. Prior to December 1, 1998 the implementation date of the new Firearms Act, Bill C-68, an act respecting firearms and other weapons, first session, 35th Parliament, the only authority under which the other police and law enforcement agencies could seize firearms was the Criminal Code offence of illegal possession. Since that offence is all inclusive, the police and law enforcement communities records pertaining to illegal possession seizures do not specify smuggling or trafficking.

Among various other measures, the new firearms legislation created new offences and strict penalties for firearms smuggling and trafficking, provided controls for the import and export of firearms and created bans on many firearms with no legitimate use. The newly created offences empower the police and law enforcement agencies to pursue smuggling and trafficking charges specifically related to seized firearms.

The firearms licensing and registration system is the foundation for all of these enforcement and regulatory measures. In addition to the licensing and registration system, there will be a registry maintained containing specific information pertaining to all firearms seized or recovered by law enforcement agencies. The provision in the legislation which requires police and law enforcement agencies to report all seized and recovered firearms is scheduled to come into effect in 2001. The gathering of such information on a national basis will provide administrative and investigative assistance to the law enforcement community and will provide the ability to more easily extract information pertaining to types of offences, specifics of the firearms recovered or seized, et cetera.

Revenue Canada: The Department of National Revenue has no data with respect to parts (a), (d) and (e) of the question. However, the following chart provides data related to seizures of firearms categorized as either prohibited, restricted or unrestricted that the Department of National Revenue carried out during the years 1994, 1995, 1996, 1997 and 1998.

While data is provided with respect to seizures of firearms, the persons from whom the firearms were seized cannot be identified as either gun smugglers or illegal gun traffickers as these seizures of firearms could have been from individuals who failed to declare they had a firearm in their possession or in their vehicle when they entered Canada.

[Peter Adams, Liberal, Peterborough, ON]

Mr. Speaker, I suggest that the remaining questions be allowed to stand.

[The Speaker]

Is that agreed?

[Some hon. members]

Agreed.

Request For Emergency Debate

[The Speaker]

I am in receipt of a notice of motion for an emergency debate under Standing Order 52 from the hon. member for Saanich—Gulf Islands.

I have his letter. Would he care to tell us what it is all about precisely and in just a few words? I ask him not to read the whole letter but just to tell us what it is all about.

[Gary Lunn, Reform, Saanich—Gulf Islands, BC]

Mr. Speaker, to summarize it, as we heard in Oral Question Period the federal government has commenced expropriation proceedings in British Columbia. It claims it has been in negotiations for two years. This is unprecedented. I submit it would set an extremely dangerous precedent in Canada to allow this without even having some discussion here.

To my knowledge none of the opposition parties received any information from the government. We have no idea what negotiations have gone on. This would allow us an opportunity to question the government and find out what has been going on. This would be an extremely dangerous precedent that would open the doors for expropriations in other parts of Canada in an area where we do not want to go.

The government sought ownership of this land through the Supreme Court of Canada in 1984. It was rejected then. The court ruled that it was under the ownership of British Columbia in the Constitution.

I would submit, given all that, that an emergency debate would be appropriate so we can have an opportunity to find out what in fact the government has been doing to avoid this expropriation and what discussions have gone on with the province of British Columbia. To date we have had zero information from the government with respect to that.