Debates of Feb. 7th, 2012

Procedure and House Affairs

[Joe Preston, Conservative, Elgin—Middlesex—London, ON]

Madam Speaker, pursuant to Standing Orders 104 and 114, I have the honour to present, in both official languages, the 14th report of the Standing Committee on Procedure and House Affairs regarding the membership of the committees of this House.

If the House gives its consent, I move that the 14th report of the Standing Committee on Procedure and House Affairs be concurred in.

[The Deputy Speaker, NDP, Denise Savoie]

Does the hon. member have the unanimous consent of the House to propose this motion?

[Some hon. members]

Agreed.

[The Deputy Speaker, NDP, Denise Savoie]

The House has heard the terms of the motion. Is it the pleasure of the House to adopt the motion?

[Some hon. members]

Agreed.

[The Deputy Speaker, NDP, Denise Savoie]

(Motion agreed to)

Sickle Cell Disease

[Kirsty Duncan, Liberal, Etobicoke North, ON]

Madam Speaker, I am pleased to present this petition regarding sickle cell disease and thalassemic disorders.

Sickle cell disease affects blood cells which carry oxygen throughout our bodies. In sickle cell disease, red blood cells harden into long slivers that block veins and arteries causing injury to blood vessels of organs, including the brain and lungs. About 10% of children develop strokes. Children with sickle cell are also extremely vulnerable to infection and have periodic health crises that cause terrible pain and difficulty breathing. The lifespan of persons with sickle cell disease can be reduced by as much as 30 years.

The petitioners call upon the House of Commons to adopt Bill C-221, An Act respecting a Comprehensive National Strategy for Sickle Cell Disease and Thalassemic Disorders.

The Environment

[Chris Charlton, NDP, Hamilton Mountain, ON]

Madam Speaker, I am pleased to table a petition today in support of the interfaith call for leadership and action on climate change.

The petitioners rightly point out that the growing crisis of climate change is symptomatic of greed and an underlying spiritual deficit which has led to unsustainable patterns of production and consumption. The signatories call upon the government to recognize that global warming is a reality and that climate change affects all Canadians and people around the world. They rightly call on Canada to lead by example instead of waiting for others to act.

To that end, the petitioners are calling on the government to do three things: First, to work toward a new international agreement to replace the Kyoto protocol that binds all nations to a new set of carbon reduction targets; second, to establish a national target within Canada that we ourselves can achieve; and third, to play a constructive role internationally to fund climate mitigation efforts around the world.

I will conclude by thanking the interfaith community for staying active on this file despite, or perhaps as a result of, the Prime Minister's outrageous contention that the Kyoto protocol is stupid. It is time for the Prime Minister to act like a leader in the fight against climate change.

Nuclear Disarmament

[Linda Duncan, NDP, Edmonton Strathcona, AB]

Madam Speaker, I wish to draw to the attention of the House a petition that is a call for Canada to host a conference on nuclear disarmament. It is a petition calling on the Government of Canada to respond to UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon's proposal for a summit on nuclear disarmament.

In 2010, this House unanimously passed a motion that encouraged the Government of Canada to deploy a major worldwide Canadian diplomatic initiative in support of preventing nuclear proliferation and increasing the rate of nuclear disarmament.

Therefore, the petitioners call upon the Government of Canada to issue an invitation to all states to gather with Canada in Canada to begin discussions for a global legal ban on nuclear weapons.

The Environment

[Linda Duncan, NDP, Edmonton Strathcona, AB]

Madam Speaker, I have a second petition from the residents of Alberta drawing the attention of the House to the fact that there is considerable concern that fracking creates the possibility of poisoning the water source in the province.

Therefore, the petitioners request that Parliament legislate a moratorium on fracking on lands under its jurisdiction.

Shark Finning

[Elizabeth May, Green, Saanich—Gulf Islands, BC]

Madam Speaker, I rise this morning to present two petitions.

The first petition comes from residents primarily in the Victoria area of British Columbia and deals with an issue that the House has had presented a number of times, which is the subject of a private member's bill, and that is the issue of shark finning. The removal of the fin of the shark for no purpose other than to prepare a particularly rare soup is one dish leading to the annihilation of a species, with as many as 70 million sharks killed every year.

The petitioners call on the House of Commons to ban the possession, trade, distribution and sale of shark fins in Canada. It is a very compelling issue.

National Parks

[Elizabeth May, Green, Saanich—Gulf Islands, BC]

Madam Speaker, the second petition relates to the treatment of our national parks and the opening up of a national park, which is not only Canada's highest order of conservation but is recognized as a United Nations world heritage site. I refer to Jasper National Park and a proposal for which a decision has now been deferred. These petitions are still very valuable and urge that we turn down a private sector development proposal for something to be called the Brewster glacier discovery walk in Jasper National Park.

This petition comes from residents of Saanich—Gulf Islands and I urge the House to give it its full attention.

Citizenship and Immigration

[Kevin Lamoureux, Liberal, Winnipeg North, MB]

Madam Speaker, today I table a petition from individuals who are concerned about the government's decision to put a freeze on people's ability to sponsor their parents or grandparents.

For many years, immigration policy allowed for the reunification of parents and grandparents with their children here in Canada and the Government of Canada has made the decision to apply a freeze, thereby not allowing children to sponsor their parents.

The petitioners find this to be a cruel policy, one that does not take into consideration that the right mixture of people being able to immigrate to our country is required and part of that mixture is in fact parents and grandparents. They are calling upon the government to lift that freeze.

Questions on the Order Paper

[Tom Lukiwski, Conservative, Parliamentary Secretary to the Leader of the Government in the House of Commons]

Madam Speaker, I ask that all questions be allowed to stand.

[The Deputy Speaker, NDP, Denise Savoie]

Is that agreed?

[Some hon. members]

Agreed.

Bill C-19—Time Allocation Motion

[Peter Van Loan, Conservative, Leader of the Government in the House of Commons]

Madam Speaker, I move:

That, in relation to Bill C-19, An Act to amend the Criminal Code and the Firearms Act, not more than one further day shall be allotted to the consideration at report stage of the bill and two sittings days shall be allotted to the consideration at third reading stage of the said bill; and

That, 15 minutes before the expiry of the time provided for government orders on the day allotted to the consideration at report stage and on the second day allotted to the consideration at third reading stage of the said bill, any proceedings before the House shall be interrupted, if required for the purpose of this order, and in turn every question necessary for the disposal of the stage of the bill then under consideration shall be put forthwith and successively without further debate or amendment.

[The Deputy Speaker, NDP, Denise Savoie]

Pursuant to Standing Order 67.1, there will now be a 30-minute question period. I invite all hon. members who wish to ask questions to rise in their places so the Chair has some idea of the number of members who wish to participate.

As is the custom, as Chair I will give preference to the opposition but will recognize some members from the government side.

The hon. member for Windsor—Tecumseh.

[Joe Comartin, NDP, Windsor—Tecumseh, ON]

Madam Speaker, I must admit that I was a bit surprised today by the government House leader having to read this motion. He has done it so many times, I would have thought he could have simply stood and, from memory, repeated the same motion.

Since this Parliament started, we have had one closure motion and we are now seeing our 13th time allocation motion. There have been 12 since Parliament returned in September of last year. As always, every time this happens it is a new record for the government.

We really need to wonder what the government is so scared of in terms of the debate. I think this is the first time, however, that the motion puts time allocation both on report stage and on third reading. We have not even had any indication from the government as to when time will be allocated on the calendar for third reading.

I wonder if the minister could tell us when the debate on third reading will start?

[Vic Toews, Conservative, Minister of Public Safety]

Madam Speaker, I will leave that issue to the government House leader.

With respect to the debate on this particular issue, we have debated this issue both in the House of Commons and in coffee shops across the country for the past 17 years.

I recall when the hon. Allan Rock came to see me when I was the provincial attorney general in Manitoba and tried to compel the Province of Manitoba to enforce his long gun registry. I made it very clear to him then, back in about 1997 or 1998, that we would not do that. In fact, the Manitoba government has consistently not enforced the long gun registry. The NDP Manitoba government knows that it is a waste of time and money. It is focused on real crime, as is this government, rather than treating law-abiding hunters, farmers and sports shooters as criminals.

[Chris Charlton, NDP, Hamilton Mountain, ON]

Madam Speaker, I think the Minister of Public Safety just basically made the point himself. What is the rush? The issue has been around since 1997. In 2006, we started debating the issue in this House. Why do we need a time allocation motion?

I am glad the minister is answering instead of the government House leader because I will remind him of some things he said in this House.

In 2001, the Minister of Public Safety said:

For the government to bring in closure and time allocation is wrong. It sends out the wrong message to the people of Canada. It tells the people of Canada that the government is afraid of debate, afraid of discussion and afraid of publicly justifying the steps it has taken.

What else did the minister say? On a separate occasion, again in 2001, he said:

Mr. Speaker, yesterday the Prime Minister of Canada swung an axe across the throat of parliament. ... If the bill was the right thing to do, why did the Prime Minister do the wrong thing by invoking closure?

What has changed?

[Vic Toews, Conservative, Provencher, MB]

Madam Speaker, I find it astounding that the member would ask what has changed in respect to this issue. We have been debating it for 17 years. That is almost as long as some of the members across the way are old.

I have patience. I have argued this issue for a long time. What the member is suggesting is that perhaps we wait another 17 years.

This is the real rationale behind the NDP members' strategy here. They are deliberately, on every criminal bill, trying to get the government to invoke closure so they can say that it is a new record. The real record is their obstinacy in terms of passing criminal legislation that would actually protect victims and get criminals.

[Kevin Lamoureux, Liberal, Winnipeg North, MB]

Madam Speaker, what is noteworthy here is the fact that the government has really taken a rule and, I would argue, has abused the rule and the privileges of members of this assembly.

What the government continuously does, and it is becoming a procedure, is introduce legislation and soon thereafter brings in time allocation. I am not as much concerned about the subject of this bill as I am offended that the government House leader, who, I would argue, is likely the worst government House leader we have seen for many years inside this chamber because of his inability to negotiate agreements between the other House leader, reverts to, time and time again, shutting down and limiting debate inside this chamber by bringing in time allocation.

Is it the government's intention to use time allocation as a standard procedure in order to wind up debate on all the different types of legislation before this House?

[Vic Toews, Conservative, Provencher, MB]

Madam Speaker, it is interesting to note that the member, after being in the House for a year and a half, has now indicated that our House leader is the worst he has ever seen. That is quite an experience to rely on. In fact, I have to say that our House leader is a very patient man, a very decent man, a very honourable man. The type of comment made by the member is uncalled for. I know the member for Winnipeg North is much more of a gentleman than to make that type of comment.

In respect of the use of time allocation, he knows the issue of the long gun registry has been around for at least 17 years. We have debated this in every election. We have made it clear in every election that we would get rid of the long gun registry.

I know what happened in my own riding, which was held by a Liberal who in fact even voted against the long gun registry. It was not enough to save him back in 2000 because the people of rural Canada and indeed in suburbia and in the downtown of cities understand that this is not a system that works.

[Linda Duncan, NDP, Edmonton Strathcona, AB]

Madam Speaker, with all due respect, I find the comments by the minister to be very offensive to the democratic standards in this country.

We are seeing around the world people in nations rising up and asking to be governed by the rule of law, to institute real democracy.

We hear the hon. member across the way state the case that the nation should be run based on a party's election platform.