House of Commons Hansard #72 of the 41st Parliament, 2nd Session. (The original version is on Parliament's site.) The word of the day was rights.
Peter MacKay ConservativeMinister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada
Mr. Speaker, I think we can all agree that this is a very emotional, very divisive debate. It also has issues of jurisdiction that have to be considered. We know that the matter is now in fact before the courts and for that reason, as Attorney General, I will comment no further.
Dan Harris NDP Scarborough Southwest, ON
Mr. Speaker, during question period, after the Minister of the Environment answered a question by the member for Churchill, the Minister of International Trade made an inappropriate gesture, making a gun with his hand while saying “boom” in the direction of the member for Churchill.
I am sure that every member would agree that this gesture has no place in the House of Commons, and I would like to ask the minister to apologize.
Ed Fast ConservativeMinister of International Trade
Mr. Speaker, this member is making that up. It is completely false. I made no such gesture. I said no such word.
I am surrounded by my colleagues here. None of them saw me make a gesture or make that kind of a comment.
I ask that member to apologize to me and to this side of the House.
Corrections and Conditional Release ActPoints of OrderOral Questions
Some hon. members
Oh, oh!
The Speaker Conservative Andrew Scheer
Order. I have given the floor to the hon. member for Malpeque. I will hear his point of order. I will ask other members to come to order. The hon. member for Malpeque.
Wayne Easter Liberal Malpeque, PE
Mr. Speaker, I am rising on a point of order in relation to private members Bill C-483, which stands in the name of the member for Oxford.
I want to begin by stating that my concerns are not related to the intent of the bill. I also want to acknowledge that the member for Oxford placed this bill before the House and the committee with the best of intentions, and in his remarks both in the House and at committee, he stated eloquently and with conviction the intent and principle behind the bill.
However, I would submit to the Chair that in the process of the committee's examination of both the bill and the amendments that the government was compelled to bring forward, the bill as amended has in fact moved a great deal away from its original intent and principle as articulated by the member for Oxford, as well as other members of the government in speaking to the bill and witnesses who testified before committee in support of the bill, all of whom were in support of the bill prior to the government amending the bill, but which is now substantially different from what those witnesses and members were speaking to.
At this point I would also draw to the attention of the Chair the fact that each of the private members' bills by government members that has come before the public safety and justice committees have required amendments that most often have exceeded the number of original clauses in the bills.
This, I would submit, is a situation of either bad drafting of bills or of government members insisting upon a specific course within their private members' bills, resulting in legislation that is so flawed that the government, with its legal advisers, literally has to redraft the legislation through the use of amendments.
The private members' bills in question were Bill C-489, Bill C-479, and now Bill C-483.
Corrections and Conditional Release ActPoints of OrderOral Questions
Some hon. members
Oh, oh!
The Speaker Conservative Andrew Scheer
Order. I am having difficulty hearing the member for Malpeque.
Corrections and Conditional Release ActPoints of OrderOral Questions
Some hon. members
Oh, oh!
The Speaker Conservative Andrew Scheer
Corrections and Conditional Release ActPoints of OrderOral Questions
Some hon. members
Oh, oh!
The Speaker Conservative Andrew Scheer
Order. I suggest that the members who do not wish to hear the member for Malpeque's point of order perhaps leave the chamber and come back when they are ready.
The hon. member for Malpeque is raising an issue with the Chair, and I would like to hear the point he is making. I will ask the members who are standing around and talking to take their conversations outside the chamber, calm down a little bit, and then return. The hon. member for Malpeque.
Wayne Easter Liberal Malpeque, PE
Mr. Speaker, as I was saying, the private members' bills in question are Bill C-489, Bill C-479, and now Bill C-483. I would suggest that this is a matter the Chair might wish to carefully examine.
With respect to Bill C-483, I would like to cite a number of references made by the member for Oxford and other members of the government with respect to what the intent of the bill was and what in essence the principle of the bill was.
At page 1236 of Debates, November 21, 2013, the member for Oxford stated what the purpose and the principle of Bill C-483 was. He said:
The bill proposes to grant the Parole Board of Canada authority for the full length of the sentence to grant or cancel escorted temporary absence for offenders convicted of first or second degree murder.
...This would mean that the wardens of federal prisons would no longer have authority to grant temporary escorted absences to inmates convicted of first- or second-degree murder, except in a medical emergency.
There is no ambiguity in the statement by the member as to the intent of the legislation. The bill was written to specifically remove the ability of wardens to grant escorted temporary releases.
Under the current legislation, Correctional Service of Canada, through the wardens of federal institutions, has the authority, when offenders serving a life sentence are within three years of their eligible parole date, to grant escorted temporary absences.
The reason the member has moved, through Bill C-483, to undertake these changes to the Corrections and Conditional Release Act, were stated as follows during second reading debate on November 21, 2013, at page 1236 of Debates:
...for some victims' families, the decision-making authority of wardens to grant escorted temporary absences to murderers has been a matter of great concern. ...
...no hearings are conducted, as decisions are made on an administrative basis by institutional heads. In contrast, when decisions by the Parole Board of Canada are made, hearings are conducted....
The member continued by saying:
...when the Parole Board of Canada conducts a hearing, a victim or a member of the public who applies in writing is permitted to attend....
During the course of second reading, the Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness contributed, at page 1241 of Debates, November 21, 2013, to the declaration as to what Bill C-483 would achieve. She stated:
...the bill we are here to talk about today relates to escorted temporary absences from prison. More specifically, it is about ensuring that only the Parole Board of Canada has the power to release prisoners except in very limited circumstances.
There is no ambiguity as to what the member for Oxford or the parliamentary secretary believes Bill C-483 would bestow upon victims. They would have a direct role as participants in the escorted temporary absence system from the first day of incarceration until the last day of incarceration of those convicted of first and second degree murder.
The parliamentary secretary continued at page 1241 by stating:
As the member for Oxford has said, we continue to hear calls from victims of crime who feel that decisions on these absences should remain with the Parole Board, rather than an unaccountable official.
During the course of the hearings on the legislation before the public safety committee, the statements related to the key principles of the bill were restated a number of times. I will not go through all of those particular statements from witnesses, other than to say that as noted on page 11 of the Evidence, Sue O'Sullivan, Federal Ombudsman for Victims of Crime, stated on March 25:
Bill C-483 seeks to amend the Corrections and Conditional Release Act to shift the authority of the warden to authorize the escorted temporary absence, or ETA, of an offender convicted of first- or second-degree murder within three years of full parole eligibility to the Parole Board of Canada. At its core, this bill aims to bring a more transparent and inclusive process to victims of crime.
Let me sum up in layman's terms.
The Speaker Conservative Andrew Scheer
I appreciate the point the hon. member is raising and I wonder if he could give some indication to the Chair as to how much more he has to go through. If he is making a rather lengthy submission, it might be better for the House if we picked up on his point after routine proceedings, but if he is wrapping up, I will let him conclude.
Wayne Easter Liberal Malpeque, PE
Mr. Speaker, I would agree with you. I indicated at the start it would be a fairly lengthy point of order, and I would be willing to do it later. The key point is that the bill is substantially changed from the principle that was introduced in the House and that it came back to the House as a different bill. However, I will conclude those remarks when you give me the point in time later.
The Speaker Conservative Andrew Scheer
I appreciate the hon. member's flexibility. I think it would serve the House if we could go through routine proceedings. Then I will give the floor back to him to conclude his remarks.
Tim Uppal ConservativeMinister of State (Multiculturalism)
Mr. Speaker, pursuant to Standing Order 32(2), I have the honour to table, in both official languages, the summary of the Global Centre for Pluralism's corporate plan for 2014.
Government Response to PetitionsRoutine Proceedings
Regina—Lumsden—Lake Centre Saskatchewan
Conservative
Tom Lukiwski ConservativeParliamentary Secretary to the Leader of the Government in the House of Commons
Mr. Speaker, pursuant to Standing Order 36(8), I have the honour to table, in both official languages, the government's responses to 10 petitions.
David Christopherson NDP Hamilton Centre, ON
Mr. Speaker, I have the honour to present, in both official languages, the fourth report of the Standing Committee on Public Accounts in relation to its study of chapter 2, “Access to Online Services”, of the fall 2013 report of the Auditor General of Canada.
Pursuant to Standing Order 109 of the House of Commons, the committee requests that the government table a comprehensive response to the report.
Pierre-Luc Dusseault NDP Sherbrooke, QC
Mr. Speaker, I have the honour to present, in both official languages, the third report of the Standing Committee on Government Operations and Estimates, in relation to its study of the main estimates 2014-15.
Randy Hoback Conservative Prince Albert, SK
moved for leave to introduce Bill C-590, An Act to amend the Criminal Code (blood alcohol content).
Mr. Speaker, I rise to introduce my private member's bill, an act to amend the Criminal Code on blood alcohol content.
The act amends section 22 of the Criminal Code to establish more severe penalties for drunk drivers who have blood alcohol content that exceeds twice the legal limit. The bill would increase penalties for drunk drivers who harm or kill.
(Motions deemed adopted, bill read the first time and printed)
Dave Van Kesteren Conservative Chatham-Kent—Essex, ON
moved for leave to introduce Bill C-591, An Act to amend the Canada Pension Plan and the Old Age Security Act (pension and benefits).
Mr. Speaker, I am pleased and honoured to rise today to introduce my bill, an act to amend the Canada pension plan and the Old Age Security Act. The bill would ensure that those who are convicted—
The Speaker Conservative Andrew Scheer
Order, please. The hon. member for Chatham-Kent—Essex has the floor.
Order. The hon. member for Chatham-Kent—Essex.