House of Commons Hansard #160 of the 41st Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament's site.) The word of the day was offender.
The Deputy Speaker NDP Joe Comartin
I have the honour to lay upon the table the annual reports on the Access to Information Act and the Privacy Act of the Office of the Commissioner of Official Languages for the year 2011-2012.
These reports are deemed permanently referred to the Standing Committee on Justice and Human Rights.
Rick Dykstra ConservativeParliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Citizenship and Immigration
Mr. Speaker, pursuant to Standing Order 32(2), I have the honour to table, in both official languages, the 2011 annual report of the Global Centre for Pluralism.
Shelly Glover ConservativeParliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Finance
Mr. Speaker, pursuant to Standing Order 34(1), I have the honour to present, in both official languages, the reports of the Canadian Branch of the Assemblée parlementaire de la francophonie respecting its participation at the Bureau Meeting and the 37th Ordinary Session of the Assemblée parlementaire de la francophonie, held in Kinshasa, Democratic Republic of the Congo, from July 4 to 8, 2011; and the 28th Regional Assembly and the Conference of Branch Chairs of the America Region of the Assemblée parlementaire de la francophonie, held in New Orleans and Baton Rouge, Louisiana, from August 8 to 10, 2012.
Randy Hoback Conservative Prince Albert, SK
Mr. Speaker, pursuant to Standing Order 34(1) I have the honour to present, in both official languages, the report of the Canadian section of ParlAmericas respecting its participation at the Annual Gathering of the Group of Women Parliamentarians, held in Valaparaiso, Chile, May 8 and 9.
International TradeCommittees of the HouseRoutine Proceedings
October 5th, 2012 / 12:05 p.m.
South Shore—St. Margaret's Nova Scotia
Conservative
Gerald Keddy ConservativeParliamentary Secretary to the Minister of International Trade
Mr. Speaker, I have the honour to present, in both official languages, the fifth report of the Standing Committee on International Trade, in relation to Bill C-24, An Act to implement the Free Trade Agreement between Canada and the Republic of Panama, the Agreement on the Environment between Canada and the Republic of Panama and the Agreement on Labour Cooperation between Canada and the Republic of Panama.
The committee has studied the bill and has decided to report the bill back to the House without amendment.
Malcolm Allen NDP Welland, ON
moved for leave to introduce Bill C-449, An Act respecting a National Local Food Day.
Mr. Speaker, I want to thank my colleague and good friend from Pontiac who works extremely hard in this House on behalf of his constituents, especially in the agricultural field.
The bill speaks to this very day, the Friday before Thanksgiving, as a day when we would honour those primary producers and those who put that feast, as we like to call it, on our tables at Thanksgiving. We would simply like to thank and commemorate them by having an official day to recognize them. This is not a cost to the government. It is not about declaring a holiday. This is about declaring a day of thanks.
Quite often when we are sitting with our families, for those of us who are blessed to have that opportunity, we give thanks to our family, and perhaps some people choose to give thanks in a spiritual way. However, we do not always give our thanks to those who actually gave us the food and helped produce it in the first place, which is what this bill is all about.
The bill is to give thanks to those primary producers for the hard work they do all year long. We are thankful for what they are going to put on our table at Thanksgiving. We should recognize this by ensuring that the Friday before Thanksgiving is set aside in honour of all Canadians and to thank those producers across this great land.
(Motions deemed adopted, bill read the first time and printed)
Bruce Hyer Independent Thunder Bay—Superior North, ON
Mr. Speaker, I have the pleasure today to present a petition on behalf of the residents of Thunder Bay, Mobert and the Pic Mobert First Nation and other communities along the north shore of Lake Superior in support of bringing back passenger rail service to the spectacular north shore of Lake Superior.
The petitioners are asking parliamentarians to support Motion No. 291 to return passenger rail from Sudbury through White River, Thunder Bay to Winnipeg and beyond.
Hélène Laverdière NDP Laurier—Sainte-Marie, QC
Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to present a petition signed by a number of people from the greater Montreal area. This petition highlights the fact that, although the government committed to contributing 0.7% of the GDP to development assistance, with this government our assistance is currently less than 0.3%, which is one of the lowest rates among donor countries. The petition also points out the cuts made to Development and Peace, a well-known organization that does important work.
The petitioners are calling on Parliament to adopt the following policy goals: demonstrate international responsibility by re-committing Canada to contribute 0.7% of GDP to official development assistance; prioritize responsive funding to those NGOs that Canadians support and which have seen their funding cut by CIDA; and in the spirit of global solidarity, provide in full the funding of $49.2 million requested by Development and Peace over the next five years.
Ed Komarnicki Conservative Souris—Moose Mountain, SK
Mr. Speaker, I would like to present a petition from constituents in Manor, Cando, Langbank, Fertile, Wakaw and other areas who are calling upon Parliament to assemble to confirm that every human being is recognized by Canadian law as a human, by amending section 223 of our Criminal Code in such a way as to reflect the 21st century medical evidence.
Kevin Lamoureux Liberal Winnipeg North, MB
Mr. Speaker, I table a petition from constituents of mine in Winnipeg North indicating support for old age security, the guaranteed income supplement, and the Canada pension plan. The petitioners are asking that these programs be supported by the government, particularly that the retirement age be maintained at age 65.
Questions on the Order PaperRoutine Proceedings
Regina—Lumsden—Lake Centre Saskatchewan
Conservative
Tom Lukiwski ConservativeParliamentary Secretary to the Leader of the Government in the House of Commons
Mr. Speaker, if Questions Nos. 836 and 849 could be made orders for return, these returns would be tabled immediately.
Mike Sullivan NDP York South—Weston, ON
With regard to the disposition of federal heritage properties: (a) since 2006, how many federal heritage properties lost their heritage designation, broken down by year and province, and for what reason; (b) of the properties in (a), how many were disposed of by the federal government, broken down by year and province, and to whom; and (c) since 2006, how many federal heritage properties have been disposed of by the federal government, broken down by year and by province, and to whom?
(Return tabled)
Matthew Kellway NDP Beaches—East York, ON
With regard to the F-35 JSF Program: (a) what is the total Canadian dollar value of benefits received by Canadian industry from Canada’s participation in the F-35 JSF Program (i) from the start of the program until December 1, 2011, (ii) from December 2, 2011 to June 22, 2012; (b) what is the projected value of future contracts, from June 22, 2012, onwards, that come as a result of Canada’s participation in the JSF program; (c) for the contracts in (a), what is the value of each contract that was awarded and on what date was each contract signed; (d) what methodology was used to determine the value of (i) the contracts in (a), (ii) the contracts in (b); (e) was there industry involvement in determining the values of (i) the contracts in (a), (ii) the contracts in (b); (f) do these valuations include analysis related to the global supply chain; (g) do these valuations include and/or anticipate changes in the domestic supply chain; (h) is the information used in the valuations updated periodically and, if yes, how frequently; (i) was the methodology used to arrive at the values in (a) and (b) independently audited and, if yes, by whom and what was the result of the audit; (j) since the start of the program, have there been discrepancies between projected and actual value of benefits received by Canadian industry; (k) if the answer to (j) is in the affirmative, what are the specific instances and contracts where discrepancies occurred, including (i) the value of each discrepancy, (ii) the name of each company that was meant to receive the benefit; (l) what, if any, changes have been made to the valuations and projection processes used to determine all and any cost projections related to the F-35 JSF program in response to the recommendations in the April 2, 2012, Auditor General's report; (m) for the contracts in (a), is there a means of ensuring that the contracts are being fulfilled as stated in terms of dollar value; (n) for the benefits in (a), how many jobs have been created as a result of participation in the program, (i) are these new jobs and, if so, how is “new jobs“ defined, (ii) how long are these jobs projected to last (i.e., are they start-up or long-term jobs), (iii) who calculates these job numbers and is there independent auditing of these numbers?
(Return tabled)
Tom Lukiwski Conservative Regina—Lumsden—Lake Centre, SK
Mr. Speaker, I ask that all remaining questions be allowed to stand.
The House resumed consideration of the motion that Bill C-37, An Act to amend the Criminal Code, be read the second time and referred to a committee.
Increasing Offenders' Accountability for Victims ActGovernment Orders
The Deputy Speaker
We had three minutes left in questions and answers.
Raymond Côté NDP Beauport—Limoilou, QC
Mr. Speaker, I thank my hon. colleague from Vaudreuil-Soulanges for sharing his personal experience with us. It was very interesting and reminded me of an organization in Quebec City called L'Autre Avenue, which offers an alternative to the judicial process in some cases, such as in the case of a dispute between a minor offender, so to speak, and the victim, for instance. It is very interesting.
When I had the opportunity to meet the executive director, she told me that victims are not always looking for compensation nor do they necessarily want the offender to be convicted. They simply want to be informed of the process and to know that the offender is remorseful. This allows the police to avoid automatically prosecuting every individual they arrest. This also helps victims feel like an important part of the judicial system, because often, they feel forgotten.
I wonder if my colleague could share his thoughts on such alternative measures.
Jamie Nicholls NDP Vaudreuil—Soulanges, QC
Mr. Speaker, it is important to look at what the Province of Quebec is doing for young offenders. Clearly, Quebec's approach is different. Every scientific study shows that Quebec's approach is producing positive results. Quebec's recidivism rate is lower than in the other provinces.
I suggest that the government take note of the fact that every province takes a different approach to dealing with young offenders and to look at Quebec as a positive example.
Anne-Marie Day NDP Charlesbourg—Haute-Saint-Charles, QC
Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank my colleagues, who contributed a well-informed and different point of view to fuel debate on Bill C-37, the Increasing Offenders’ Accountability for Victims Act.
Let us review the provisions of Bill C-37, which have been discussed at considerable length already. The bill proposes to amend provisions of the Criminal Code concerning victim surcharges in order to double the amount offenders must pay when they are sentenced. The bill also makes the surcharge mandatory for offenders.
This morning, we heard a moving account from the member for Vaudreuil Soulanges, and it made a deep impression on me. Unfortunately, in discussing this bill, we are also talking about victims. It cannot be avoided, because victims are the ones who are the most affected and who suffer the most from such events.
We heard the account by the member for Vaudreuil-Soulanges this morning, and I would like to add something else.
Yesterday evening, I was having supper with my family, who told me that bus drivers are often assaulted. Someone this happened to personally told me that a person had got on the bus and punched them in the face. The person in question was simply angry because the bus did not pull up to the stop quickly enough, which sometimes happens when a car is in the way, for example.
There have been several assaults of this kind in our province. Bus drivers are attacked at the end of their shift. These people feel powerless, as the member for Vaudreuil-Soulanges demonstrated clearly this morning.
People feel powerless when they are attacked, first of all because they do not expect things like that to happen to them. People also do not expect offenders to do things like that, because it is not part of our upbringing to be assaulted and to have to be on the defensive. People believe they live in a safe country.
This bill proposes to amend Criminal Code provisions in order to double the victim surcharge. Needless to say, we support this. The surcharge would increase to 30% from 15% of any fine imposed on the offender. Where no fine is imposed, the surcharge would be $100, up from $50, for summary conviction offences. It would increase from $100 to $200 for indictable offences. This section is somewhat complex, but in short, the fines are being doubled.
These amounts are significant. Particularly as those who receive them to assist victims are often community groups. In Quebec, they are called Centres d'aide aux victimes d'actes criminels, or CAVACs, and there are equivalent centres across Canada. They are often groups that intervene to provide assistance to victims.
People often do not know that such a system exists and that they can contact a CAVAC if they are victims of a crime.
The CAVACs are funded as follows. They receive funds that are generated in part by offenders, and contribute them towards the activities conducted by groups that provide assistance to victims of crime.
The NDP members will be supporting this bill, but they have reservations. They would like it to be re-examined in committee, simply because judges are not being allowed to impose sentences that may vary, as needed and depending on the person before them. Once again, this is something that comes up in many of the bills I have seen recently in the House.
Many offenders live in poverty. These are criminal groups or individuals with records. In some cases mental illness is involved, but not necessarily. For example, these people may be dropouts who have lived on the street with nothing and who systematically resist integrating into our society, because it does not suit their values. They want something different and they want to make their own laws.
We must intervene and educate them; this is important.
I would like to remind the House of something. In 2003, crime cost about $70 billion, $47 billion of which was borne by victims. That figure represents 70% of the total cost. A 2004 study estimated that the cost of the pain and suffering suffered by victims was in the region of $36 billion. It is truly important to understand the victims, and the NDP will continue to support families in this regard.
Many eligible victims very rarely seek compensation, one reason being that they do not know these services exist. The member for Vaudreuil—Soulanges said this again this morning. He did not know that there might be a system like that. The system also helps to reassure the victim and lets them know these measures exist and sometimes helps them cover various expenses. When a person is a victim of violence, they are scared, they do not take the same routes they used to, they are afraid to get on the bus or go out in a car, afraid of being accosted even when they are walking on the street, and so on. We have to offer these people services, and that has a social cost. Often, the victims do not even think of asking for anything.
Our concerns relate to the elimination of the judge’s discretion to decide whether paying a surcharge would cause undue hardship. In Quebec, and I imagine things are the same in the other provinces, although I have not checked, judges sometimes decide to require a person to do community service when they do not have the means to pay the surcharge in question. These surcharges are important, because they largely fund the assistance provided for victims. They may even cover up to 100%.
Sometimes, when a person is unable to pay the surcharge, they are required to perform community service. It must be open to the judge, at their discretion, to decide that the young person in question will have to approach a community group, and the group will have them do painting, wash windows, and so on. An entire system is in place to help the young person. I say “young person” because young people are often the ones on whom surcharges are imposed, in the case of petty crimes committed by gangs, for example, as the member for Vaudreuil—Soulanges described this morning.
It is important to retain community service. The measure would be too punitive it if were applied in its simple form. That is why we are asking that this bill be referred to committee. We will then be able to examine it and fix some of its flaws. We hope the surcharges will not be disproportionate to the offender’s ability to pay.
I will support this bill at this stage of the legislative process in the hope that the Standing Committee on Justice and Human Rights will take all the time it needs to examine it, meet with stakeholders and perhaps amend certain aspects that need to be reconsidered. This bill is good for families, but it could be even better and at the same time preserve the right, the power and the flexibility that are needed for making the best possible decisions.