Debates of Oct. 26th, 2009

Ending Conditional Sentences for Property and Other Serious Crimes Act

[Rick Norlock, Conservative, Northumberland—Quinte West, ON]

Mr. Speaker, the short answer is the member for Mississauga South has never been accused of understating things. As a matter of fact, he is embellishing quite well.

He says there are going to be 5,000 more people sent to jail. I could make a good argument that it may be just the very opposite because people will realize there is going to be a tremendous cost to it. What is the alternative?

It is fine for him to talk about those things, but under his party's government, people were being released after serving one-sixth of their sentence based on no other reason than to save dollars.

It is time that we had some common sense in our judicial system and some balance. That is what this bill does. It brings balance and common sense back to our judicial system. People respect that.

[Peter Stoffer, NDP, Sackville—Eastern Shore, NS]

Mr. Speaker, I thank the member for Northumberland—Quinte West for his speech and his work as a police officer on the front line for many, many years.

Is the debate based on politics; that is, what is best to be elected or what is best for society? No party has the wherewithal to say that it is the party with this issue and no other party can debate or talk about this issue. It is simply not true. Every single member of Parliament has had people come to them over their period of time here to talk about a crime that has been committed against them, what they have read in the paper, or what they have seen on the news. In many cases, unless people have been in a courtroom and understand the procedure from the time the crime has been committed to the sentencing aspect of it, many of us just simply get our information from what we hear. If we have been victims of crime, we understand the process a little better than others.

The previous speaker spoke about people doing time in prison and what happens when they are there? That is the key. It is one thing to say to someone that they are going to jail for six months, six years, 25 years, but what happens to that individual behind bars? What happens to them in the prison system? Are the human resources there to actually try to change this person's opinion? Are they there to say, “All right, buddy, what you've done was seriously wrong. That type of behaviour was against society's rules. Now we are going to ask you to work with us and we are going to try to correct that behaviour”.

The reality is that what we get from the Conservatives is the back end of what we call the justice issues. We do not know if they are acting on a revenge premise or the justice issue. I will give them the benefit of the doubt, because I know a lot of them personally, and I think that they are actually trying to do what they believe is best for their constituents and Canadian society.

When we debate these types of issues, we have to have an honest and thoughtful debate, one that is not pointing fingers at anybody. No riding is exempt from crime. No person in this House is an expert on what to do in this regard. That is why it is important for the House of Commons to have this type of debate and eventually committees can bring in experts.

When we have this type of debate, we would think that the government, with all the research capability at its fingerprints, when it brings legislation forward in terms of increased sentences or whatever it brings, that it would be able to bring up the financial costs as well, not just the cost of what happens when the crime is committed but the actual costs of longer duration of prison time for these perpetrators.

The Conservatives should be able to come up with those answers fairly quickly. They have all the research capability at their fingertips, but we never get that from them until much later. If they are looking for more support, if they are looking for more positive debate on this particular issue, I ask them to bring those financial figures forward. Then we can find out exactly who will pay for this. It is one thing to say to someone, “Buddy, you did something wrong. We are going to tack on an extra 10 years to your sentence”, but there is a financial cost to that, a financial cost to the taxpayers of Canada.

I remember a Conservative Party once in this place called the Reform Party, and its members always said that nothing should be presented to the House until a dollar figure was attached to it, and it did not matter what it was. This particular Conservative Party, if there are any fiscal conservatives left over there, seems to have forgotten that aspect of it. Plus, we are asking the government, where is the evidence that this will actually deter crime? Where is the evidence? That is all we are asking for.

We are not saying what the Conservatives are doing is wrong or right. All we are asking is, where is the evidence that these particular pieces of legislation will indeed do exactly what they say it will do? If they brought that and the cost figures forward, they would probably get a lot more support in the initial stages of this discussion.

I will give the Conservatives credit for bringing forward issues that a lot of people do not like to talk about. However, if we cannot debate these issues in the House of Commons, then where can we debate them?

I agree. There are some people in this country, if I had them in front of me, I do not know what I would do with them after seeing some of the crimes they have committed. But I have asked for over twelve and a half years, through many justice ministers, including two with the Conservative Party, to bring forward a comprehensive child Internet pornography bill, and I am still waiting.

I have had the legislation. A previous member here had the legislation. The former attorney general of Saskatchewan, Mr. Chris Axworthy, brought it forward many times. We are still waiting. From Liberals and Conservatives, we are waiting to stop child pornography in this country. Whether or not we can completely stop it, I do not know, but the reality is that we have to do a lot better to protect our children in this regard.

It does not just necessarily mean putting those perpetrators behind bars. It is trying to get at the root of the problem first.

A priest once told me that when dealing with crime or anything of this nature, crime is like dandelions. We can cut off the tops of the dandelions but if we do not get at the root of the problem, they will just grow back again, and this is what we in the NDP have emphasized for many years. We have to get at the root of the crime to really prevent it from happening again. That is where the real investment and real expenditures should be made.

If we can create for the families and children of communities right across this country, from coast to coast to coast, a system of ensuring that they all have proper nutrition, proper education, proper housing, proper health care, et cetera, many of them would not fall into the lap of crime, but unfortunately, when they do not see a way out, many of them resort to substance abuse and to criminal activity in order to get through their lives on a day to day basis. In fact, many of them fall into gangs.

This is what happens when we do not invest in families and children right from the very beginning. We can lock them all up but we are never going to prevent it from happening. There is no question that deterrents will have an effect on some people, but if we are truly serious about justice issues in this country, we have to get at the root of the problem to begin with.

Crime has been with us since time immemorial. We have always had some form of thievery in this country, ever since man has been around. Since Adam and Eve we have had some form of crime in this world, and not one person has been able to completely stamp it out. We know that when we look at the Scandinavian countries, when we look at the European countries and what they are doing in prevention, and we see what they are doing when criminals are in jail, we see that many times they will not repeat what they have done before, and also many of them do not commit the crime in the first place.

It begs the question: What do we do with someone who murders three children? What do we do with someone who has had 12 impaired driving charges, and on the 13th time, went and killed someone?

In my own riding, when I first became an MP, I will never forget it. We gave a beautiful 18-year-old girl a grade 12 graduation certificate. Three months later, we sent her family a condolence card on the death of their daughter because of a drunk driver in Nova Scotia who had nine impaired driving charges. On the 10th one he got it right. He finally killed someone. He went to jail for the maximum sentence at that time of eight years.

I can assure members that I and my entire community were very upset with the fact that it was only eight years. I would love to have seen a more personal, longer sentence. But we have to ask ourselves how he got a driver's licence after every single other offence. The fact is that we did not get at the root of that problem. We just slapped him on the wrist. We put him in jail the first time, fined him, and then just let him carry on his way.

Society, in fact politicians at all levels, failed the system because we forgot to go after this guy and teach him from the beginning that drinking and driving was an unacceptable aspect of our society and that thou shalt not do it again, but we just ignored it and passed it on.

Again, if we are going to prevent crime from happening, we have to get at the roots of it. It is critical that we as parliamentarians look at the roots of all of this in society from our aboriginal people to new immigrants, to gangs, to the whole bit. For the Conservative Party to say that it has all the answers is simply not true.

Here is something else that is really quite offensive in many ways. RCMP officers, in many ways, are the front line warriors when it comes to crime in this country. They are the ones who are up all night. They are the ones who go after the bad guys in our communities.

What does the Conservative government do? People who understand agreements with the RCMP know that the RCMP does not have an association or a union. After six months through the RCMP pay council, it turned around and agreed to a 3.5% increase. That is not very much money for our brave men and women who wear the red serge. The government agreed to it and signed the deal that said this is what they were going to receive. What happened on December 23? In an email, just before Christmas, what did the Conservatives do? They told the RCMP that, without debate, without discussion, they were going to rollback that increase they agreed to back to 1.5%.

What is the Conservative Party saying to the RCMP? “Yes, we value your service. We're proud to have you as police officers in this country doing the job that we ask you to do. And when we negotiate in writing and agree to your pay increase, yes, we're going to honour that”. Then, without notice, bang. Gone. Rolled back to 1.5%. I have yet to hear one Conservative stand in this House and apologize for that action. It begs the question: Why did they roll back that salary without debate in the House of Commons, without any previous warning, and just prior to Christmas? I have spoken with many RCMP officers and their families across this country who are very upset and very angry over that.

I will say this to the federal government, and these Conservatives, if they care to listen. They do not have all the answers to crime and punishment in this country. However, by working co-operatively in this House of Commons, we can work together to ensure that those perpetrators of serious crimes do pay the time that they deserve. However, at the same time, for all of those people who are suffering from mental health issues, from social issues, from all other issues, who find no other way in life but to resort to crime, we as a society should be there to invest in those early treatment programs to ensure that they do not fall into crime in the first place.

If we have that ability, as a Parliament, to do that, then I think we can not only reduce crime drastically in this country but we as a society will be able to move forward, as other countries have as well.

[Brent Rathgeber, Conservative, Edmonton—St. Albert, AB]

Mr. Speaker, I listened to the member very carefully. He talked about getting to the root of crime, and I do not disagree that that is part of the equation, but I did not hear him talk about victims. And of course, on this side of the House, we are very concerned about victims. We certainly want to provide support to those victims.

My specific question for the member is this. What do we say to victims who have had their house broken into, their personal possessions rifled through, their property stolen, and then they find out that the perpetrator served the sentence inside his or her own house, under an order of house arrest?

[Peter Stoffer, NDP, Sackville—Eastern Shore, NS]

Mr. Speaker, if the individual was listening to my speech earlier, he would know that I did talk about victims. I talked about one lady in my riding who lost her daughter to a drunk driver.

Having lived in Yukon and witnessed a tremendous amount of crime there, and having also lived in British Columbia and Nova Scotia and seen many friends who were victims of crime, every single one of those people are very angry and very upset.

One of the things that I have always sought is victim impact statements. Every single victim should have their day in court to tell the judge and the jury exactly what the offender has done that created turmoil in their lives. I believe that if every victim had the opportunity to appear before a judge and/or jury to make an victim impact statement, it would assist the legal system tremendously.

[The Acting Speaker, Conservative, Barry Devolin]

Order, please. I must interrupt at this time. The member will have eight minutes remaining in questions and comments when the House returns to this matter.

Statements by members. The hon. member for Ancaster—Dundas—Flamborough—Westdale.

Bill C-384

[David Sweet, Conservative, Ancaster—Dundas—Flamborough—Westdale, ON]

Mr. Speaker, is there anything more valuable and more sacred than life itself?

Right from birth, our bodies and minds are designed by instinct to protect ourselves from what we sense is harm and to preserve life.

Mindful of this, I find it troubling that the Bloc has introduced a bill that would allow a medical practitioner to take the very life that he or she was sworn to protect. At best, the bill can be called irresponsible.

Would we not be better off as a society discussing how to comfort those in pain, to support the families who are struggling with caring for a terminally ill member or how we could better support the valiant efforts of nurses and doctors who are providing hospice care across the country?

Surely, we would never consider the intentional taking of a life by medical practitioners would ever be acceptable in our nation. I will be voting against Bill C-384 and I urge all of my parliamentary colleagues to do the same.

Global Handwashing Day

[Carolyn Bennett, Liberal, St. Paul's, ON]

Mr. Speaker, October 15 marked Global Handwashing Day.

The WHO and other health organizations worldwide are encouraging people to wash their hands to avoid and prevent the spread of H1N1 disease.

Handwashing not only prevents the spread of H1N1 but it can save the lives of thousands of children in the developing world. Pneumonia is the leading killer of children in the world, killing more than any other disease combined: AIDS, malaria, measles.

Simple handwashing with soap can reduce the rate of child morbidity by 44% while curbing the incidence of pneumonia and diarrhoeal disease by up to 30% in children.

Canada has an opportunity to be a real leader internationally on child health issues by investing an initial funding commitment of $10 million to $15 million to the global sanitation fund, a multilateral fund that supports community driven sanitation and handwashing programs in the poorest communities around the world.

The world's children cannot wait any longer. Canada cannot wash its hands on this issue.

International Day of Climate Action

[Yvon Lévesque, Bloc, Abitibi—Baie-James—Nunavik—Eeyou, QC]

Mr. Speaker, while a group of young people, including a number of Inuit, are on the Hill today calling for global, immediate and co-ordinated action to counter the most significant threat to the world, climate change, Canada is hard at working sabotaging negotiations leading up to the Copenhagen conference. It is demanding, through its Minister of the Environment, less stringent greenhouse gas reduction targets than those of its European and Japanese partners.

On Saturday, events were held throughout Canada to highlight the International Day of Climate Action. Thousands called for the government to not only implement the Kyoto protocol but to also develop a serious plan to fight climate change.

This government must stop hiding behind false pretexts, such as its industrial structure, and finally take action.

Allain Ouellette

[Yvon Godin, NDP, Acadie—Bathurst, NB]

Mr. Speaker, last week the Business Development Bank of Canada announced the winners of the 2009 Young Entrepreneur Awards.

One of my constituents, Mr. Allain Ouellette from Bathurst, was the winner for the province of New Brunswick.

In 2004, Allain purchased City Glass & Locks, a small custom glass company, and turned it into an example of what can be done with know-how and an entrepreneurial spirit. Today, City Glass & Locks serves the entire province of New Brunswick and has grown by 20% per year.

With the team of seven employees already in place when he purchased the company, Allain has diversified the services offered by City Glass & Locks and developed the commercial side of the business.

In five years, the company's staff has doubled to 14 employees.

Congratulations to Allain, who is contributing to the economic development of northeastern New Brunswick with his know-how and entrepreneurial spirit.

Poppy Campaign

[Greg Kerr, Conservative, West Nova, NS]

Mr. Speaker, this Friday, the Royal Canadian Legion will launch its annual Poppy Campaign, making available millions of the flowers of remembrance to support the poppy fund.

The poppy has become the most recognized symbol of remembrance in Canada. We wear it to remember those who have served and sacrificed so that future generations might know peace and freedom.

I want to take this opportunity to remind Canadians about the extent of the support that the poppy fund provides. The basic purpose of the fund is to offer emergency assistance to veterans and their families, including food, shelter and medical attention, but the fund reaches beyond this. It provides community medical equipment, such as defibrillator units, support for day care centres, student bursaries, meals-on-wheels programs and even disaster relief.

I encourage all Canadians, young and old, to make a donation and wear a poppy with pride. Lest we forget.

Pensions

[Bonnie Crombie, Liberal, Mississauga—Streetsville, ON]

Mr. Speaker, I have just returned from a very successful forum on pension reform, hosted by my hon. colleague from York West.

The topics we discussed were those of the complaints many of us on this side of the House have been hearing from our constituents over the past many months.

Ravi and Harvie are from my riding and they are both former Nortel employees. Since Nortel's bankruptcy, Ravi and Harvie, like thousands of other Canadians, have no pension left to collect.

Those in need are too numerous to name, Nortel and other unsecured pension funds in many industries across our country. It is clear that the government needs to take action. Instead, it leaves pensioners without retirement income that they have worked for.

Today we discussed their concerns and we are committed to improving the quality of life for seniors, providing dignity for seniors and raising seniors out of poverty. The priority of pension funds and bankruptcy and the current unsecured creditors regime, which is a federal not provincial responsibility, must be changed.

We understand that those on long term disability are adversely impacted and they need help too. When can we expect the government to act?

Medical Radiation Technologists

[Patricia Davidson, Conservative, Sarnia—Lambton, ON]

Mr. Speaker, November 8 to 14 is MRT week, a celebration of the contributions of the medical radiation technology profession to health care in Canada.

If people have ever had an x-ray, MRI or CT scan, a mammogram, nuclear medicine procedure or radiation therapy, they have been in the care of these highly educated, highly skilled professionals as they capture diagnostic images or applied radiation therapy.

MRTs are integral members of the health care team who are certified to perform precise diagnostic imaging procedures and administer radiation treatment to cancer patients.

MRTs make an enormous difference to patients in hospitals and clinics, to athletes injured in sport and in the most challenging conditions as members of National Defence medical units on the battlefields in Afghanistan.

I am proud to have been a past member of this profession and honoured to bring the contributions of Canada's medical radiation technologists to the attention of the House today.

Marie-Antoinette Riverin

[Robert Bouchard, Bloc, Chicoutimi—Le Fjord, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I would like to mark the passing of the oldest citizen of Saguenay—Lac-Saint-Jean, one of my constituents, Marie-Antoinette Riverin, who passed away on September 27 at the respectable age of 108. For some time, she had been considered the oldest person in Quebec.

Not only did Ms. Riverin live a long life, but she also no doubt left a lasting impression on the many generations who followed her. She was in excellent health, and worked as an elementary school teacher before studying nursing, which she practised for over 41 years.

Speaking personally and on behalf of my Bloc Québécois colleagues, I offer our sincerest condolences to the family and friends of Marie-Antoinette Riverin.

Infrastructure

[Bob Dechert, Conservative, Mississauga—Erindale, ON]

Mr. Speaker, since this parliamentary session began, the Liberal leader has been trying to force an unnecessary and opportunistic election at every turn. He and his party throw mud, make baseless accusations and present false information in their attempt to force an unwanted election.

They even voted against important recession fighting measures, such as the home renovation tax credit.

We are working hard with governments across Canada to make valuable infrastructure investments that are helping communities and creating and maintaining jobs during this global recession.

Last week, the deputy premier of Ontario, George Smitherman, confirmed that the infrastructure spending was fair. This week former Liberal MP, Carolyn Parrish, said:

...the recent infusion of infrastructure stimulus dollars...is the largest pot of money ever to be bestowed on the City of Mississauga....

We are getting the job done. The Liberal leader should listen to Canadians, support these important projects and stop making baseless accusations.

Louis Berkel

[Anita Neville, Liberal, Winnipeg South Centre, MB]

Mr. Speaker, I stand today to pay tribute to and honour the memory of Rabbi Louis Berkel who died last week in Winnipeg at the age of 95.

In 1954, he joined the Shaarey Zedek Synagogue in Winnipeg where he served as a cantor and assistant rabbi for over 50 years. A soft-spoken man, he has been described by many as a gentle soul. His work, his teaching and his kindness, coupled with his humility and his dedication to the immediate needs of both the Jewish and non-Jewish communities of Winnipeg, made him greatly loved and respected. His cantorial voice soared when he chanted the traditional prayers, allowing him to draw those around him into the spiritual space he inhabited.

His legacy will be in the lives well lived by the thousands of students who were privileged to have him as their teacher. I would like to quote the words of the Dalai Lama, for they exemplify the life of this very special man:

Love and compassion are necessities, not luxuries. Without them humanity cannot survive.

Justice

[Sylvie Boucher, Conservative, Beauport—Limoilou, QC]

Mr. Speaker, our government has introduced a number of bills to maintain law and order. We must also ensure that criminals serve their time.

Many criminals are released early, which undermines Canadians' faith in our judicial system. That is why our government is committed to solving the problems associated with parole.

Despite what the Leader of the Opposition says in front of the cameras, the Liberals' attitude towards this is appalling.

Meanwhile, the Bloc leader claims to have a monopoly on the truth about crime, but when it comes time to make decisions, he stands firmly with the criminals. How can the Bloc leader sleep at night, while children are being exploited by human traffickers?

Quebeckers cannot trust either the Liberals or the Bloc Québécois when it comes to getting tough on crime. This is all about protecting our families and making our communities safer.

Long Service Congratulations

[Peter Stoffer, NDP, Sackville—Eastern Shore, NS]

Mr. Speaker, I am proud today to stand in the House to recognize one of Parliament Hill's greatest employees, Mr. Robert “Bob” Beauchamp. Bob Beauchamp has been on Parliament Hill for 31 years, serving this great House and all of its members. He has been through eight prime ministers and many elections.

Mr. Beauchamp was also the local president of his union, working with the membership in order to bring better value and benefits to this workers. Without Mr. Beauchamp and the people who work on Parliament Hill, we as parliamentarians could not do our job.

We thank his wife Sharon, his children Kimberley, Christopher, Patrick, and his six grandkids for sharing Bob with all of us. Whether one is driving a bus, moving tables or moving legislation, we are all part of the democratic process. We salute Bob for 31 years of great service. He will retire on November 12. We wish him the very best. God bless Bob.

Firearms Registry

[James Bezan, Conservative, Selkirk—Interlake, MB]

Mr. Speaker, on November 4 an important vote will take place to scrap the long gun registry, which is a bill sponsored by the member for Portage—Lisgar. It is finally time for this billion dollar boondoggle to end and the vote on November 4 is an important step toward that end.

We know the Liberal leader and the leader of the NDP support this waste of taxpayer money. We also know there are opposition MPs who campaigned on scrapping the long gun registry and have told their constituents they will stand up to their political masters here in Ottawa and protect the local way of life for their constituents.

Across the country, concerned, law-abiding gun owners, sports enthusiasts and farmers have expressed discontent with the Liberal boondoggle. It has damaged the way of life of thousands of Canadians while doing nothing to prevent gun crimes.

Many Canadians across the country are opposed to the long gun registry. We call on those opposition MPs to support their constituents' view and vote to scrap this boondoggle once and for all.

The Environment and Climate Change

[Meili Faille, Bloc, Vaudreuil—Soulanges, QC]

Mr. Speaker, a recent poll reveals that the Conservatives trail far behind public opinion when it comes to the environment and climate change.

In fact, 56% of the 1,000 respondents from across Canada believe that the Conservative government's approach to climate change is not ambitious enough.

The majority of the respondents also believe that wealthy countries like Canada have a responsibility to set new, higher and harder targets than less developed countries such as China and India. Countries like Canada and the United States have to take a global approach if they want to have a real impact on climate change.

Clearly, most Canadians do not support the Conservatives' arguments about climate change.

It is high time this government understood the message that the public is sending it and stopped doing everything in its power to derail the negotiations leading up to the Copenhagen conference.

Stephen Lewis Foundation

[Frank Valeriote, Liberal, Guelph, ON]

Mr. Speaker, I would encourage my colleagues in the House to join me in supporting the Stephen Lewis Foundation “Dare to Remember” challenge. The foundation supports grassroots community-based organizations and their efforts to turn the tide of HIV-AIDS in Africa.

Since 2003, the foundation has funded over 300 projects in 15 African countries, focusing on women, grandmothers, orphans and people living with HIV-AIDS. It is a remarkable accomplishment and one that has improved the lives of countless people suffering from the effects of this terrible disease while giving them hope.

Guelph has a long-standing commitment to this issue and a lengthy tradition of global citizenship.

Today I dare members of the House and local and national media to join me in making a donation of $50 to $100 to this very worthy cause and to view stephenlewisfoundation.org for more information. Every dollar donated will provide care and enhance the well-being of those in desperate need.

Parole System Reform

[Stephen Woodworth, Conservative, Kitchener Centre, ON]

Mr. Speaker, our government has been clear in its efforts to reform the parole system in this country. We promised Canadians we would replace the automatic release of prisoners with a system of earned parole. We take this issue seriously and offer no apologies to those who would prefer we were softer on crime.

People sentenced as drug dealers or for white collar crime now have a paper only review and can be released after serving only one-sixth of their sentences. Canadians expect that when a person is sentenced for a crime, that person will serve the time. This party will take steps to end the current practice. We will seek to abolish the practice of paroling offenders after they have served only one-sixth of their sentence.

Canadians want criminals to serve their full sentence and to earn their parole. Canadians want to feel safe in their homes and communities. We call upon the opposition to support our efforts, do what Canadians want and make the country safer for law-abiding citizens.

Health

[Ralph Goodale, Liberal, Wascana, SK]

Mr. Speaker, survey after survey about the H1N1 vaccine shows a dangerous trend. Only half of Canadians are planning to get vaccinated. That is down from two-thirds in July. Too many people do not think the vaccine is safe, do not think it is necessary. That communications failure could put lives at risk.

How does the Prime Minister justify an advertising tsunami of $100 million for partisan Conservative propaganda, but only a pittance for crucial information about vaccinations?

[Tony Clement, Conservative, Minister of Industry]

Mr. Speaker, the hon. Minister of Health is doing an excellent job of communicating to Canadians about the H1N1 flu situation. She has said that the vaccine will be available to every Canadian who needs and wants it. The Minister of Health and the Chief Public Health Officer are urging Canadians to get the vaccine. This is the best way to protect our health and the health of our loved ones.

Despite the fearmongering on the other side, we are focused on protecting the health and safety of every Canadian.

[Ralph Goodale, Liberal, Wascana, SK]

Mr. Speaker, in Quebec doubts about the vaccine are the highest: 60% of Quebeckers say they do not want it. Doubt is greatest among young adults. Although they are in a high risk group, 64% say they are opposed to the vaccine.

In this climate of confusion, why is this government spending 12 times more on partisan propaganda than on public information on the flu?

[Tony Clement, Conservative, Minister of Industry]

Mr. Speaker, we are distributing the vaccine across the country, in Quebec and in all the provinces and territories. We support the use of the vaccine. We have said it is important for everyone and all Canadians will have a chance to get vaccinated.

It is important that every Canadian know that this is important for his or her own health and safety and for his or her family's health and safety. We have been crystal clear on this point. I wish it were the same for the opposition as well.