House of Commons Hansard #95 of the 41st Parliament, 2nd Session. (The original version is on Parliament's site.) The word of the day was countries.

Topics

Justice for Animals in Service Act (Quanto's Law)Government Orders

1:35 p.m.

NDP

Hélène LeBlanc NDP LaSalle—Émard, QC

Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank my colleague from Joliette for her speech. She clearly showed that the members on this side of the chamber recognize the work done by service animals that help the police and others. We realize just how important that is. We cannot ignore that.

Since we are coming up to the end of the session, is my colleague curious to know why this bill is being debated now? Although it is quite commendable, this private member's bill has now become a government bill.

I am wondering what the government's priorities are right now. Can my colleague talk about that? Can she also tell us about the priorities of the official opposition?

Justice for Animals in Service Act (Quanto's Law)Government Orders

1:35 p.m.

NDP

Francine Raynault NDP Joliette, QC

Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague for her question.

I too wondered why this bill was introduced today at the end of the session. It could easily have waited until next fall or some other time. We know that 2015 is an election year. I am sure the Conservatives can give us an answer.

We think that there are more important bills we should be studying at the end of the session, especially since we are sitting until midnight every night. We have time to study them.

It seems like the people talking in the House today are mostly from the NDP, not the other parties.

Justice for Animals in Service Act (Quanto's Law)Government Orders

1:35 p.m.

NDP

François Lapointe NDP Montmagny—L'Islet—Kamouraska—Rivière-du-Loup, QC

Mr. Speaker, I will have, at most, 20 minutes to talk about Bill C-35. That is actually a good thing because, as you can hear, I am a little hoarse thanks to yet another virus my children passed on to me. I will take the time to enunciate clearly to compensate for the unusually rough sound of my voice.

I am the third NDP MP in a row to speak to this bill. I would like to explain to the people who are doing us the honour of listening to us on CPAC that we are sitting until midnight every night for the entire month of June until the House adjourns. We are doing this because the Conservative government wants to move bills forward. However, people will notice that most of the MPs who are taking the time to speak to the bills being debated in the House are members of the NDP. One might have thought that the government asked for longer sitting hours because it wanted to defend its views on certain private members' bills or government bills. That is not the case. Some evenings, the Conservatives are often absent from the debates even though they themselves decided to extend sitting hours. That really bothers me. I would like to go back to the reason why this place is called what it is called. This is a parliament. We are parliamentarians, and it is our duty to rise and speak in the House on behalf of our constituents. The way the current government is running the House really bothers me. It really worries me too.

I have a few minutes to talk about Bill C-35, which would create a new offence that would apply when a law enforcement or military animal is injured or killed in the line of duty. As some of my colleagues have already pointed out, this bill was initially introduced as a private member's bill but was then taken over by the current government. We will be supporting this bill at second reading so that it can be studied in committee.

I would like to address those who are honouring us by watching us on CPAC. I want to be sure that they really understand what is happening. We are supporting the bill at second reading. It will not become law automatically. It will be introduced before one or more committees that are directly involved with the issues in the bill. I am part of the Standing Committee on Fisheries and Oceans. I definitely will not have the opportunity to study the bill, since it has nothing to do with fisheries. Other colleagues of mine, those who are part of the official opposition and are experts in legal matters, will make sure that they share their opinions with the committee. Some of my colleagues, who work very hard, will propose amendments. However, I have little hope that it will go well. Committees are not nearly as collaborative as they should be because of the culture this government has imposed. However, as the official opposition, we have a duty to stand up for the institutions of Parliament. We must continue to debate these issues every step of the way, despite the government's lack of good faith, in the hope that bills will be improved. That is what can happen when the work of Parliament is done properly and appropriately.

We have serious concerns about two of the bill’s provisions, in spite of the fact that we will be voting in favour of it on second reading, but not at its final reading. The first is the six-month minimum sentence provided for in the bill, and the second is that the sentence is to be served consecutively to any other sentence imposed on the offender arising out of the same offence.

Let me explain things more clearly. If a person is charged with assaulting an RCMP officer, he will certainly receive a sentence for committing that offence or for having fled from an RCMP officer. That person will have committed an offence. However, if at the same time, the officer’s dog was injured or killed, another sentence will be tacked on to the one initially imposed for the primary offence. An offender could therefore be sentenced to 18 months in jail for assaulting a police officer and to a minimum of six months in jail for having, for example, stabbed the officer’s service dog.

One important clarification needs to be made for those watching these proceedings at home. Just because we are critical of some of these provisions does not mean that we are insensitive toward animals. Members on the other side are always trying to paint us in this light. As soon as we ask questions, they claim that we are opposed to the very foundation of a bill under consideration.

The Conservatives even kept repeating that we sided with pedophiles when they introduced a highly controversial bill and lumped possession of a few marijuana plants together with amendments to the child pornography legislation. It was preposterous. I am a father and I was furious for three weeks.

The Conservatives have a habit of systematically saying that if members of the opposition ask questions about or do not support their bills, then they must be on the side of the criminals or they must hate animals. This is a completely deplorable way of engaging in a debate. Our friends opposite have a habit of acting this way.

Let me be clear that we are not against animals. I once owned a magnificent Doberman. I have fond memories of the dog training classes I took with Peanut. When we brought her home, she was so little that we named her Peanut. One hundred pounds later, we still called her Peanut.

Dog owners will understand what I am saying. I was proud of my girlfriend at the time when she would venture out late at night to pick up some milk at the corner store. She felt safe because she had a Doberman with her. Animals help people feel safe. Once we have experienced this, we are profoundly moved. I do not think that I am being overly emotional. Those who have owned pets understand the feeling.

My position today should not be seen as being anti-animal, and the NDP should absolutely not be seen as being a party that is opposed to animal rights. On the contrary: the member for Parkdale—High Park introduced Bill C-232, An Act to amend the Criminal Code (cruelty to animals), a bill that would repeal the cruelty to animals provisions that appear in the part of the Criminal Code that covers property, in recognition of the fact that animals can feel pain.

That fundamental change was brought forward by a New Democrat member who asked that we stop looking at animals the same way we look at a table or a chair or a doorknob. Believe it or not, the party in power opposed it. The party in power absolutely will not consider this important factor that would help raise awareness to companion animals. In spite of that, they have now introduced something very specific, like Bill C-35, which boils down the government’s interest to only a few types of animals, when it comes to improving animal rights and conditions. There is a price to be paid when we get to the courts, and that is discretion.

First, the credibility of judges is attacked, in this case with no valid or genuine justification. Quanto, an Edmonton police dog, was unfortunately stabbed to death while he was attempting to intercept a fleeing suspect, in October 2013. That is the event that inspired Bill C-35. The accused, Paul Joseph Vukmanich, pled guilty to evading police and cruelty to animals. He therefore acknowledged that it made no sense to attack the assistance animal that was working with a police officer. He was sentenced to 26 months in prison. He will be prohibited from owning a companion animal for the next 25 years. This is a superb example of the value and importance of judicial discretion. Even the idea of 25 years without a companion animal is not included in the clauses of the bill introduced today. It was a judge who, based on his wisdom and understanding of case law and of what happened during that event, reached a very worthy decision.

Constantly demanding very detailed parameters, minimum or maximum sentences, and requiring that judges follow them, as the present government does, in a way amounts to contempt for the wisdom of our judges.

In fact, when I put it to one of my rare government colleagues who spoke on the subject, the member for Richmond Hill, he was unable to refute that conclusion.

He was unable to say that the judge had erred, that the decisions made in the Paul Joseph Vukmanich case were incorrect or that the penalties were too light. Instead he outlined the Conservative Party’s positions in a highly incoherent manner. For example, he said the court had taken too long to reach a verdict in the accused’s case. Since he was awaiting his verdict in prison, he did not really serve his full 26-month sentence. What an incredible admission.

It is not because Canadian judges are soft on crime; it is because the justice system lacks the resources to ensure the work is done within a reasonable period of time. Consequently, we wind up with nonsensical situations in which someone has awaited judgment in prison for such a long time that the sentence he receives is really minimized. That has nothing to do with any alleged “softness on crime”. It has everything to do with the lack of resources in the justice system. We will have to address that in order to avoid this kind of situation, and we will not be able to do so with a bill such as this.

Every expert will tell us that the government’s tendency to constantly extend minimum sentences is contributing to an increase in the time spent mounting a defence and arguing cases in the courts and thus the time required to render verdicts. This is a highly nonsensical situation that increases costs. The government’s approach exacerbates the problem. Our judges are not too soft on crime. The problem is that criminals’ sentences are being minimized as a result of delays. They are waiting too long for their verdicts. This is incredible. Our colleagues opposite even admitted that their approach was contributing to the problem. Consequently, we are completely passing up an opportunity for a valid solution to these problems.

Another inconsistency in this bill is that minimum sentences do not lower the crime rate. Several American states were tempted by the approach the government in power has been imposing for several years, but they are now pulling back. It has not worked. In the case before us, I do not believe the accused who killed an Edmonton police officer’s dog with a knife would have said to himself as he opened the knife, “Oh my God, I may get at least six months.” I doubt he would have folded up his knife. Things do not work that way. This bill will not achieve the desired results. On the contrary, it will slow down proceedings and prevent the justice system from imposing the right sentences at the right time.

We have also addressed the question of creating a class of animals. I thank my colleague from Joliette for being the first to do so because this has been troubling me since I first examined the bill. Consider the example of an elderly couple who are starting to be a little concerned and are suffering from somewhat reduced mobility. They acquire a German shepherd, which is then trained to become a reliable guard dog that can tell the difference between an offender and a friend who is coming for coffee.

Imagine the worst scenario: this poor couple is attacked by the worst psychopath. Not only does he break in, but he also slits the dog’s throat and scatters its intestines around the apartment. He is a real psychopath.

The bill’s provisions would not apply in this case, because the dog would not be on official duty. The dog would have done its job as it was trained to do, it would have gone through the worst possible situation and would have confronted the worst psychopath in the history of crime in Canada, but it would not be protected by the law because it was not an RCMP service dog or a certified trained guide dog. Nevertheless, it would satisfy all of the bill’s criteria. It was trained to do a certain job and it died trying to do that job.

There is no logic in establishing a category of animals. The Conservatives believe that other animals doing their jobs do not have the right owners and therefore do not deserve to be better protected.

There is something else that we need to consider. The provisions in Bill C-35 are not any different from the sentences and fines already provided for in the Criminal Code. On reading Bill C-35, we see that the provisions it contains, such as the sentence for animal cruelty, are in line with existing provisions. Is this not actually a false problem of our judges being soft on crime, as I explained on two previous occasions? Moreover, the bill offers a false solution because it in no way amends the existing provisions. Could it get any worse? The bill addresses a false problem and offers a false solution. Questions need to be raised and put to competent people in committee.

People need to ask themselves why such a muddled and rigged piece of legislation was introduced in the House in the first place. Unfortunately, I have come to the following conclusion. As one of my Quebec colleagues mentioned at the outset of the debate, this is an attempt to target a specific group of people. I can only imagine that a Conservative Party strategist somewhere in the Prime Minister’s Office claimed a riding was lost by a mere 35 votes. In that particular riding there are 25 owners of RCMP service dogs, each with a wife and three children. Maybe they think that if they manage to get this bill passed, they will win the next time around. That may seem somewhat far-fetched, but knowing how obsessed this government is with databases and the potential to manipulate the vote, I cannot help but believe that similar thinking is behind bills as incongruous as this one.

Justice for Animals in Service Act (Quanto's Law)Government Orders

1:50 p.m.

An hon. member

Anything is possible.

Justice for Animals in Service Act (Quanto's Law)Government Orders

1:50 p.m.

NDP

François Lapointe NDP Montmagny—L'Islet—Kamouraska—Rivière-du-Loup, QC

Mr. Speaker, as my colleague said, nothing is impossible. Even though the bill that has been introduced resembles a parliamentary farce imposed by the current government, the NDP must still help preserve a modicum of respect for the institutions of Parliament, as I mentioned previously. We will do our job in committee and study the bill before it goes to third reading. We will ask experts to appear so that we can ask them fundamental questions. For example, why remove discretionary authority once again from the courts, as has been done in several other government bills? Why do that again? Have the Conservatives examined the impact of introducing minimum and consecutive sentences on the justice and prison systems? Once again, why do that? Did the government avoid consulting the provinces?

People at home need to fully understand what is going on. When individuals get a six-month sentence, they are placed in the provincial prison system. Two years ago, a number of provincial legislatures sounded the alarm and wondered why the federal government is making these decisions without consultation. If we do not ask ourselves the question, the number of people in provincial penitentiaries will rise by 10%, 15%, 20% or 30%. This is what we call “offloading to the provinces”. In the bill, could a minimum sentence violate the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms? Did the government seek legal advice on this? These are not minor questions.

Canadians can have faith in us; we will do our job in committee. We will invite competent individuals to testify, people who have decades of experience with these legislative matters. They will be able to answer our questions. We will be able to see whether the version of the bill at third reading can be supported. Despite the government's bad faith, we will do our job as parliamentarians.

Stephen Leacock Memorial Medal for HumourStatements By Members

1:55 p.m.

Conservative

Bruce Stanton Conservative Simcoe North, ON

Mr. Speaker, this Saturday, the Stephen Leacock medal for humour will be presented at a gala reception at Geneva Park Conference Centre near the city of Orillia, in my riding.

As members may recall, Stephen Leacock was Canada's most famous author of humour. Leacock, the head of McGill University's Department of Economics and Political Science for 28 years in the early 1900s, also kept a summer residence in Orillia. That is now home to the Leacock Museum as well as the annual tribute to Canadian authors of humour.

This year, the Leacock Associates have awarded the medal for humour to Cape Breton's own Bill Conall for his sophomore novel The Promised Land. It is a hilarious tale of hippies who are on a journey to Cape Breton in the 1970s. I can just imagine the humour that arises. Members also have first-hand knowledge of just how well Cape Bretoners are endowed with a knowledge and a knack for humour.

I invite all hon. members to join me in congratulating Bill Conall, winner of the Leacock medal for humour 2014.

Lake BanookStatements By Members

2 p.m.

NDP

Robert Chisholm NDP Dartmouth—Cole Harbour, NS

Mr. Speaker, Lake Banook is located in the heart of my riding of Dartmouth—Cole Harbour. Home to three different canoe/kayak clubs, it is widely recognized as one of the best natural paddling courses in the world. In fact, our community has hosted several world championship events, and just last week, CanoeKayak Canada announced that Lake Banook will be one of four national team training centres in the country. That is amazing news.

Residents know, however, that the lake is not without is challenges. Environmental issues have created problems, with excessive weed growth that inhibits our ability to use the lake to its full potential.

Considering the federal government's responsibilities for environmental protection and Dartmouth's commitment to the lake as a national and international sports venue, I encourage the government to work with the municipality to address this issue so we can keep the lake in great shape for many years to come.

Ontario Science CentreStatements By Members

2 p.m.

Conservative

John Carmichael Conservative Don Valley West, ON

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize and thank Ms. Lesley Lewis for all she has done during her tenure as CEO of the Ontario Science Centre, located in Don Valley West.

The Science Centre, an iconic cultural attraction, is an interactive public centre for innovative thinking and provocative dialogue in science and technology. It delights, informs, and challenges visitors young and old, enriching their lives and understanding through engagement with science of local, national, and global relevance.

Ms. Lewis was CEO of the science centre for 16 years, where she was instrumental in the planning process for the agents of change transformation, the greatest leap forward the Science Centre has taken since it opened in 1969.

We thank Lesley for making a difference in the lives of all those who have visited and will continue to visit the Ontario Science Centre.

Clarenville High School ChoirStatements By Members

2 p.m.

Liberal

Judy Foote Liberal Random—Burin—St. George's, NL

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize the remarkable achievement of the Clarenville High School student choir from my riding of Random—Burin—St. George's.

I join the principal of Clarenville High School, Ian Davidson, and indeed the entire community, in congratulating music teacher and choir conductor Ann Lundrigan, along with her 52 student singers, on winning a gold level award while representing Canada as the only Canadian choir in its category at the Worldstrides' Music Festival in New York City on April 11. The public school choir placed third in its category, behind two exclusively fine arts schools.

During the competition, the choir members sang three pieces: Ain't Judging no Man, Praise His Holy Name, and We Rise Again. Their hard work and unmatched enthusiasm earned the students the Spirit of New York award for the entire festival.

I ask all members of the House to join me in congratulating the Clarenville student choir and in wishing it every success. May its perfect pitch continue.

Housing IndustryStatements By Members

2 p.m.

Conservative

Phil McColeman Conservative Brant, ON

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize the importance of the housing industry in Canada, especially the efforts of the Canadian Home Builders' Association.

Our government understands the critical role this sector plays in providing quality jobs and economic growth for Canadians. More than 8,500 small and medium-sized businesses are members of the CHBA. What is more, residential investment supports more than 900,000 jobs and generates more than $120 billion in economic activity every year. However, the industry is only as strong as the ability of Canadians to pursue their housing aspirations.

I have seen first-hand the efforts of our government to lower the barriers to home ownership, affordable renovations, and rental housing. Yet more must be done to support this critical industry. Continued partnership between the government and the housing industry is important to ensure that we continue to help Canadians achieve the dream of home ownership.

PolandStatements By Members

2:05 p.m.

NDP

Peggy Nash NDP Parkdale—High Park, ON

Mr. Speaker, 25 years ago, the first cracks began to appear in the Soviet Union when the nation of Poland held its first semi-free elections. This regaining of Poland's independence on June 4, 1989 was a victory for the Solidarity movement and a blow to tyranny.

Solidarity was founded in 1980 as a trade union but grew into a massive social movement with a membership of one million and broad public support. The determination and courage these workers showed in the face of violence and repression changed the course of history.

Poland has flourished in its freedom. It has a strong and growing economy and is a leader in the European Union. The Polish diaspora, including the strong community in my riding of Parkdale—High Park in Toronto, has always played a key role in supporting the cause of freedom in Poland. I join them in acknowledging Poland's independence and the tremendous victory of the Solidarity movement.

ALS Awareness MonthStatements By Members

2:05 p.m.

Conservative

David Tilson Conservative Dufferin—Caledon, ON

Mr. Speaker, June is ALS Awareness Month, so it is important that we take note of this terminal disease and the effect it has on Canadians and their families.

ALS, or Lou Gehrig's disease, as it is more commonly known, is a rapidly progressing disease that works by killing nerves and leaving those diagnosed unable to control or initiate voluntary movements on their own. Roughly 3,000 Canadians are currently suffering from this disease, with two or three dying, on average, each day. There are no effective cures or treatments, and the financial and caregiving burden of ALS is significant.

In 2005, my father succumbed to ALS, so it has affected me personally. Each year at this time, friends, family, and supporters of those suffering from ALS dedicate their time and energy to increase knowledge of this devastating disease and to raise funds for a cure.

I encourage each member to wear a cornflower today to demonstrate our support in the fight against ALS so that together we can support families and find a cure.

Operation Blue StarStatements By Members

2:05 p.m.

Conservative

Parm Gill Conservative Brampton—Springdale, ON

Mr. Speaker, 30 years ago today marks a dark and difficult chapter in India's history. The June 1984 Indian army attack, named Operation Blue Star, on the Golden Temple in Amritsar, Punjab, one of the holiest sites for Sikhs, led to the killing of thousands of innocent pilgrims.

Today, on the anniversary of this horrible attack, we remember the innocent lives lost and their families. Their memories will live as a constant reminder of the importance of defending the fundamental values of democracy, rule of law, and human rights for all. Our thoughts and prayers are with all of those who were affected by this tragedy.

Canada PostStatements By Members

2:05 p.m.

NDP

Alain Giguère NDP Marc-Aurèle-Fortin, QC

Mr. Speaker, Canada Post has announced that new community mailboxes are to be installed in the towns of Rosemère, Bois-des-Filion and Lorraine. The installation is the result of Canada Post's plan, a plan endorsed by this government, to end home mail delivery.

In a number of cases, the new community mailboxes are going to be installed in front of residents' property. This will cause an outcry from many property owners, I am sure, not to mention the difficulties it will create for senior citizens who will have to go and fetch their mail, although this same government officially supports remaining in one's home.

This is a nasty, sloppy plan.

A responsible government would have proposed solutions to improve service and attract new customers instead of cutting services, raising prices and firing 8,000 people.

Conservative and Liberal governments have always given the middle class the short end of the stick, and now they are reducing their services to nothing. Canadians deserve better. They deserve a party like the NDP, a party that will be on their side.

Canada DayStatements By Members

2:05 p.m.

Conservative

Gord Brown Conservative Leeds—Grenville, ON

Mr. Speaker, with Canada Day fast approaching, and on behalf of the Minister of Canadian Heritage, I would like to invite Canadians from coast to coast to coast to take part in celebrating Canada's 147th birthday.

As the minister announced this morning, July 1st in the capital will pay tribute to the 100th anniversary of the beginning of the First World War, the 75th anniversary of the beginning of the Second World War, the end of the mission in Afghanistan, and the 150th anniversary of the Charlottetown and Quebec conferences.

The Canada Day noon show will include a flypast of CF-18 fighter jets and the Snowbirds demonstration team. The day and evening shows will feature Brett Kissel, the British Columbia Boys Choir, Marianas Trench, Nadja, and Serena Ryder, just to name a few.

On July 1st, please join us in celebrating another year of Canada's history strong, proud, and free.

Social and Co-Operative HousingStatements By Members

2:10 p.m.

NDP

Hélène LeBlanc NDP LaSalle—Émard, QC

Mr. Speaker, on Saturday I will be at the annual meeting of the Co-operative Housing Federation of Canada. Co-operatives help build communities, and they increase the supply of housing available for everyone. Each year, more than 600,000 Canadian households benefit from affordable housing thanks to support from the federal government. That positive contribution allows low-income individuals to live a dignified life. Unfortunately, that federal assistance is coming to an end, which could mean that some renters will find themselves in a very precarious situation. However, there is plenty of need. LaSalle—Émard has only a few co-operative housing options and housing supply is getting more and more limited. Many seniors are calling me because they are looking for affordable, safe, comfortable housing.

I am asking the indulgence of the federal government and asking that it renew funding for social and co-operative housing and ensure that there is more affordable housing available across Canada.

International TradeStatements By Members

2:10 p.m.

Conservative

Andrew Saxton Conservative North Vancouver, BC

Mr. Speaker, yesterday the Minister of International Trade welcomed ministers and high-ranking officials from the 10 member countries of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations, ASEAN, to Canada.

With more than 600 million people, ASEAN is composed of the fastest growing and most dynamic markets in the Asia-Pacific region and collectively ranks as Canada's seventh largest trading partner.

Strengthening trade and investment links with ASEAN is a key component of Canada's ambitious pro-trade plan.

Trade promotion and connecting Canadian businesses, especially small and medium-sized businesses, to international markets is part of Canada's global markets action plan to boost exports and create economic opportunities.

While the Liberals think that budgets balance themselves, and NDP members put on their tinfoil hats and fabricate conspiracy theories, our government remains focused on the real priorities of Canadians: balancing the budget, lowering taxes and creating jobs.

1989 Tiananmen Square ProtestStatements By Members

2:10 p.m.

Liberal

Irwin Cotler Liberal Mount Royal, QC

Mr. Speaker, I rise to commemorate the 25th anniversary of the Tiananmen Square massacre, wherein hundreds of Chinese citizens were murdered for standing up for rights and freedoms.

As we remember and reflect upon the protestors' courage and sacrifice, China's government continues to deny that this brutal crackdown occurred, targets those who commemorate it, and seeks to sanitize the facts of history.

Twenty-five years on, the people of China remain subject to ongoing repression and oppression, where Chinese human rights advocates, citizens, and journalists are subjected to police monitoring, imprisonment, and torture; a legal system devoid of judicial independence; limitations on religious worship; criminalization of speech; and massive repression of minorities, exemplified in the assault on the Falun Gong and ethnic minorities like the Uyghur and Tibetan people.

We must speak out on behalf of those who cannot be heard, bear witness to the continued oppression and repression, ensure that human rights are at the core of the Chinese-Canadian relationship, which we otherwise value, and that the memory, history, and lessons of Tiananmen Square will never be forgotten.

Millennium KidsStatements By Members

2:10 p.m.

Conservative

Dean Allison Conservative Niagara West—Glanbrook, ON

Mr. Speaker, Canadians took great pride in the work of the Prime Minister and the government last week as Canada focused the world's attention on the important area of mothers', newborns', and children's health.

We were able to bring together world leaders, members of civil society, and very importantly, young people.

Millennium Kids has done a fantastic job in collecting signatures. Over the last couple of weeks, I have received a number of its petitions, which I tabled earlier today.

These young men and women are rallying support for nations to meet the millennium development goals and to achieve 0.7% aid to GNP spending on foreign assistance.

I understand many children are tuning in across Canada in classrooms, and for those who made the trek to Ottawa, I want to congratulate them on their efforts.

Later this day I will be seeking the consent of the House to table the petition received from Millennium Kids.

Conservative Party of CanadaStatements By Members

2:15 p.m.

NDP

John Rafferty NDP Thunder Bay—Rainy River, ON

Mr. Speaker, one has to feel sorry for the member for Renfrew—Nipissing—Pembroke. She left NATO documents in an airport, to be found by Sheila Copps.

However, after all, leaving NATO documents lying around is actually a bit of a Conservative tradition.

It was the member for Beauce, the then minister of foreign affairs, who first perfected the practice in 2009. Then the only defence was that the documents were classified but not that classified.

Now it is only Tuesday, but it has been quite a week so far for the Conservatives.

Just yesterday, the trial of a former staffer in a voter suppression scheme began in Guelph where dozens of Conservatives are expected to testify.

Bruce Carson's former escort was called as a witness for the preliminary inquiry in his trial.

Patrick Brazeau's legal team asked for more time before a pre-trial hearing on charges of breach of trust.

All the while, the NDP has been asking questions about privacy and climate change, while the Conservatives and the Liberals, as usual, hide behind secret meetings and magically invented rules.

New Democratic PartyStatements By Members

2:15 p.m.

Conservative

Jacques Gourde Conservative Lotbinière—Chutes-de-la-Chaudière, QC

Mr. Speaker, once again, the NDP is abusing the resources of the House of Commons to do partisan work.

It is the party that is supposedly working to a build a better Canada, but here we have more evidence of opportunism. Using the ten percenter program during a pre-election period or an election period is unethical, and the NDP knows it. It is an insult to Canadians, especially if those who authorized this expense were aware of the consequences.

Now that it has been caught red-handed, let us hope that the NDP will have the decency to repay this shameful and unjustified expense.

This goes to show that the NDP has no respect for the rules established by the House of Commons and that it is worse than other opposition parties that cross the line by disrespecting taxpayers' money to serve their own interests.

PrivacyOral Questions

June 3rd, 2014 / 2:15 p.m.

Outremont Québec

NDP

Thomas Mulcair NDPLeader of the Opposition

Mr. Speaker, there is confirmation today that the Prime Minister's pick for Privacy Commissioner has given legal advice to CSIS, CSEC, and the RCMP, Canada's key surveillance and data-gathering organizations. These are the same organizations that he would now have to investigate on programs he helped to develop and approve.

Do Conservatives still not see that this is about protecting the intimate private lives of Canadians? What do they not understand about this obvious conflict of interest?

PrivacyOral Questions

2:15 p.m.

Parry Sound—Muskoka Ontario

Conservative

Tony Clement ConservativePresident of the Treasury Board

Mr. Speaker, on the contrary, Mr. Therrien is an individual who has had 30 years' experience serving the public, in the public sector. He has legal experience. He has experience on the privacy files.

This appointment was made pursuant to a very rigorous process where a number of highly qualified individuals were identified, and we have found the person who is the most qualified to actually have this position.

PrivacyOral Questions

2:15 p.m.

Outremont Québec

NDP

Thomas Mulcair NDPLeader of the Opposition

Mr. Speaker, Daniel Therrien provided legal advice on exactly how many surveillance and data-gathering programs on the intimate private lives of Canadians? How many did he approve? All of them?

PrivacyOral Questions

2:15 p.m.

Parry Sound—Muskoka Ontario

Conservative

Tony Clement ConservativePresident of the Treasury Board

Mr. Speaker, as I already said, Mr. Therrien is a qualified candidate who has a significant amount of experience in law and with respect to the confidentiality required in this position. The appointment was made pursuant to a rigorous process, which identified Mr. Therrien as a highly qualified candidate—the best candidate for this position.