House of Commons Hansard #92 of the 39th Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament's site.) The word of the day was debate.
Stockwell Day ConservativeMinister of Public Safety
Mr. Speaker, I have met on a number of occasions with the commissioner, as it is part of my job and it is what I do, along with the other heads of agencies who are responsible to this portfolio.
I can say very clearly that at no time was there any interference whatsoever from my office or by my officials in the operation of the commissioner's duties or any testimony he was giving at any time. That was always up to him entirely and at his discretion.
Lucienne Robillard Liberal Westmount—Ville-Marie, QC
Mr. Speaker, the government must be accountable for its actions in this matter. The Prime Minister must account for his minister's conduct.
How many times did the minister meet with the commissioner before he testified? When did he meet him? What instructions did he give the commissioner?
Will the Prime Minister hold his minister accountable for his actions?
Stockwell Day ConservativeMinister of Public Safety
Mr. Speaker, I cannot say it any clearer than I have, but I will continue to say it. It has never been my policy to give instructions to the commissioner in terms of what he should or should not say.
Clearly what is happening here is the members of the opposition are totally caught off guard by the fact that the commissioner has resigned. They are not nimble enough to move from their script and get on with some other questions.
Gilles Duceppe Bloc Laurier—Sainte-Marie, QC
Mr. Speaker, this year, the sad anniversary of December 6 reminds us not only of the tragedy that occurred at École Polytechnique in Montreal, but also of the recent shooting at Dawson College.
The firearms registry remains, now more than ever, an essential tool in controlling firearms. And yet, the government decided to abolish the registry.
Out of respect for the victims at École Polytechnique, Concordia University and, more recently, Dawson College, will the Prime Minister defer his decision to abolish the firearms registry?
Stephen Harper ConservativePrime Minister
Mr. Speaker, I think everyone knows that the incident at École Polytechnique is one of the worst incidents in the history of this country. We remember today the victims of that day and the victims of other incidents, such as the one at Dawson College.
This government is committed to having a firearms registry that is less expensive and more effective than the current one.
Gilles Duceppe Bloc Laurier—Sainte-Marie, QC
Mr. Speaker, although the firearms registry has been proven to work, is operational and is considered a vital tool by police forces, the Prime Minister has decided to scrap it.
However, the general consensus in Quebec is that the registry should be maintained. On this sad anniversary of December 6, why is the Prime Minister being so ideologically stubborn and holding to his plan to abolish the firearms registry at all costs?
Stephen Harper ConservativePrime Minister
Mr. Speaker, unfortunately, the current registry did not prevent the incident at Dawson College. Ideology is refusing to change things when faced with the facts.
Let me say again that this government is committed to having a registry that is less expensive and more effective than the current one. We have also proposed important measures against crime, violence, gun violence and violence against women. I hope we can count on the Bloc Québécois' support.
Maria Mourani Bloc Ahuntsic, QC
Mr. Speaker, today is the 17th anniversary of the tragedy at École Polytechnique, the tragedy that was the impetus for the creation of the firearms registry. Also, this was not an incident, as the Prime Minister said, this was a tragedy.
The Minister of Public Safety, blinded by his ideological obstinacy, is preparing to wipe out 17 years of effort to combat violence against women.
Does the Minister of Public Safety realize that by ending the firearms registry, he is wiping out 17 years of effort, with the wave of a hand, and all out of pure ideological obstinacy?
Stockwell Day ConservativeMinister of Public Safety
Mr. Speaker, today does mark the sad anniversary of the murder of 14 young women at École Polytechnique. That is why we have to remember the importance of tackling armed crime, in particular crimes against women.
We in the new government of Canada are going to continue to make the firearms registry more effective. That is why we want to strengthen the system for issuing firearms possession permits. We also want more thorough background checks to prevent firearms from getting into the wrong hands.
Maria Mourani Bloc Ahuntsic, QC
Mr. Speaker, the Canadian Association of Chiefs of Police, the Conference of Catholic Bishops, the mayors of the large cities, the Fédération nationale des enseignantes et des enseignants du Québec, the family and friends of victims and many other people in Quebec and Canada are all calling on the minister to back down and keep the firearms registry in its original form.
Why does the minister want to deprive society of this essential tool for combating crime and violence against women?
Stockwell Day ConservativeMinister of Public Safety
Mr. Speaker, the representatives of the police services of Ottawa, Toronto, Saskatoon, Winnipeg and elsewhere, representatives of victim groups and even the parents and family members of the men who have been killed in tragic incidents agree with the Government of Canada on keeping the registry of prohibited firearms, providing police officers with resources and strengthening the system. They are behind us on this.
Jack Layton NDP Toronto—Danforth, ON
Mr. Speaker, the flag on the Peace Tower today is at half-mast as we all remember the 14 women who were killed at the École Polytechnique. We also think of the hundreds of thousands of women who have been assaulted physically and sexually in Canada. The Prime Minister and all of us have stood in remembrance, but I ask the Prime Minister to stand in action.
Will he, as the NDP has done, support increasing core funding for the women's groups that advocate for equality and that advocate for the end of violence against women?
Stephen Harper ConservativePrime Minister
Mr. Speaker, as the leader of the NDP knows well, the Minister of Status of Women has committed to ensuring that funding in the program is more effective, that it goes directly into programs instead of into bureaucracy. This is real action. Likewise, it is the real action this government has taken on a range of anti-crime and anti-violence measures. We hope we will have the support of the NDP for those things.
Jack Layton NDP Toronto—Danforth, ON
Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister knows full well that support for core funding for women's organizations across the country is not being increased, not at all. If anything, it is facing cuts from the Conservative government. It is very important that we speak directly on this matter.
More than half the women in Canada are victims of physical or sexual assault. With this sort of statistic, it is hard to understand why the Prime Minister is eliminating Status of Women Canada.
Does he not recognize how urgent it is to take action on violence against women in this country?
Stephen Harper ConservativePrime Minister
Mr. Speaker, this government has made no cuts to women's programs. On the contrary, this government will provide more money for programs and less for bureaucracy.
We have taken a number of measures to deal directly with violence against women. We have increased funding to on reserve family violence shelters, for example. We have increased funding for immigrant settlement services for women. We have a range of measures to deal with sexual predators, repeat offenders, those who use guns to commit crimes against women and other citizens.
We hope the NDP will pass from talk to action and support these things.
Michael Ignatieff Liberal Etobicoke—Lakeshore, ON
Mr. Speaker, the issue in the Zaccardelli affair is now the conduct of the government. The minister was aware that he was changing his story well in advance of the speech on Monday. We know the government was providing the commissioner with communications advice. What we do not know is why the minister did absolutely nothing when he found out the commissioner was going to change his story.
Will the minister finally explain why it took over a month for him to comment on the commissioner's--
Stockwell Day ConservativeMinister of Public Safety
Mr. Speaker, I made this very clear that the commissioner had some contradictions that he had to address. There was no involvement or interference from me or any other government official.
I guess the question I would have is, why did it take members of that former government so long when they knew there was a problem with this whole Arar affair, which we did not know? We were asking questions they knew. Instead of the previous ministers asking the RCMP to explain itself, they asked no questions at no point. They just let it ride. We take action; they did not.
Michael Ignatieff Liberal Etobicoke—Lakeshore, ON
Mr. Speaker, the government has become accustomed, whenever it is in a tight corner, to blame a previous administration. Those members are the government. When are they going to start to act like one and take responsibility for their conduct?
Stephen Harper ConservativePrime Minister
Mr. Speaker, once again, the Commissioner of the RCMP has accepted his responsibilities and taken appropriate action. We have accepted that action, and I would call on the opposition to do the same thing.
As for taking responsibility, it is a matter of record that Mr. Arar and other Canadians went to prison internationally, and the Liberal Party opposite never raised a peep about it.
Right now we have a Canadian citizen jailed in China. That is why this government has taken action, whether Mr. Chrétien likes it or not.
Mark Holland Liberal Ajax—Pickering, ON
Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister has not accepted responsibility. On November 2, more than a month before Commissioner Zaccardelli testified again before committee, a letter was written to the government. In this letter from the commissioner, he outlines in clear detail the shocking reversal he was going to make public a month later. That is one month, not hours.
One month ago the government knew everything but did nothing until forced, nothing but continued statements of unconditional support for the commissioner it was bound to protect. Why did the government do nothing when it knew everything one month ago?
Stockwell Day ConservativeMinister of Public Safety
Mr. Speaker, the so-called mystery letter, which has been widely publicized and very public, was sent to all members of the Standing Committee on Public Safety. As I understand it, it was a request from the commissioner to come to the committee to talk about the issues with which he had to deal. It is hardly a mystery.
Again, the only mystery that remains is why those folks across the way, when they were in government, refused to deal with it. Why did they let somebody languish in prison and never call in the authorities to ask what had happened? That is the question.
Mark Holland Liberal Ajax—Pickering, ON
Mr. Speaker, I will table this letter. The letter will show that the government did know.
On September 28, I asked for the commissioner's resignation. I asked questions about the contradictions. The government members did not.
The Prime Minister said in question period yesterday, and repeated it today, “the government is surprised and concerned by the change of testimony” that occurred yesterday. It was an act. The letter of November 2 made it clear the commissioner had changed his testimony and the Prime Minister had known for a month.
All the mock surprise in the world cannot hide the fact that for one month the Prime Minister and the minister knew it all, yet they did nothing.
Stockwell Day ConservativeMinister of Public Safety
Mr. Speaker, it is very clear that the previous regime did nothing on this file. As soon as we got the O'Connor report, we accepted all 23 recommendations. We made sure that Mr. Arar and his family name was cleared in terms of travelling across the border points. We made sure that discussions were going on right away in terms of a settlement.
We took action on all these. Apparently, the only person in the assembly here in the chamber who knew it all is the member asking the questions. If he knew it all, why did he not raise these issues a month ago?
Serge Ménard Bloc Marc-Aurèle-Fortin, QC
Mr. Speaker, the government has just woken up to the contradictory testimony by Commissioner Zaccardelli before the Standing Committee on Public Safety. It is a little late in the game.
As early as September 28, he acknowledged that he had done nothing to stop the suffering of an innocent man, whom he believed to be innocent and whose incarceration in squalid prisons, where he was tortured, was probably due to misinformation the commissioner's subordinates had given to American security services.
Why did the government not demand his resignation then?
