Debates of Feb. 4th, 2020

Opposition Motion — Instruction to the Standing Committee on Public Safety and National Security

[Pierre Paul-Hus, Conservative, Charlesbourg—Haute-Saint-Charles, QC]

Mr. Speaker, first, I would have liked to have been notified that the amendment was going to be moved. I was not. If we get notice, we can get a better idea. I feel that, on the whole, our motion is clear and precise and should go ahead.

I have a question for the parliamentary secretary regarding his speech. He mentioned that the former board members were incompetent and that the new ones were better. Can he explain that?

[Kevin Lamoureux, Liberal, Winnipeg North, MB]

Mr. Speaker, I made reference to former and current board members, and I am very comfortable in knowing that the appointments this government made to the Parole Board have been of the highest calibre.

I would not have any problem in terms of drawing the comparison of appointments by this government to the former government. It is not meant to be a reflection on previous appointments as much as it is to give a vote of confidence for the ones who have been appointed. If we take a look at the number of appointments, we will find that under the Harper regime, they were more politically based. Ours are more merit-driven appointments.

[Some hon. members]

Oh, oh!

[The Deputy Speaker, Conservative, Bruce Stanton]

Order, please.

The hon. member for St. John's East.

[Jack Harris, NDP, St. John's East, NL]

Mr. Speaker, this is a very disturbing case. I want to outline the fact that the Parole Board was certainly aware that this individual had been given the permission to meet women, “only for the purpose of responding to [his] sexual needs”, since he had been granted parole in March 2019. It continued over this period of time, and in September the board recognized that they did not agree with the appropriateness of the strategy. However, they went ahead and continued this, so it deserves condemnation.

Bill C-5 was tabled this morning by the government to ensure that judges are familiar with, and have proper continuing education on, matters related to sexual assault law and the social context.

Does the parliamentary secretary agree that it is appropriate for the Parole Board members and for the committee on public safety to insist that there be appropriate training for Parole Board members and officials, to ensure that they are aware of the fact that this kind of case is rooted in misogyny and the devaluation of the lives of women in general and, in this case, sex workers in particular?

[Kevin Lamoureux, Liberal, Winnipeg North, MB]

Mr. Speaker, one of the encouraging aspects of the legislation that is being brought forward is the way in which even the former interim leader of the Conservative Party participated. It was a piece of legislation that would heighten the level of importance and awareness of gender-related issues and training. I see that as a very strong positive.

It is encouraging when we see political parties coming together to support initiatives such as the one we saw earlier, which is the tabling of legislation that would send a very strong message to the community as a whole. I see it as a positive, and I suspect that once it gets into committee there will be all sorts of dialogue in terms of how it could possibly be applied to other institutions. I will leave that up to the standing committee.

[Arnold Viersen, Conservative, Peace River—Westlock, AB]

Mr. Speaker, I would like to inform you that I will be sharing my time with the member for South Surrey—White Rock.

It is with heavy hearts that we come here to speak today. At the beginning of January, Marylène Levesque was an innocent young woman alive in Canada. A few weeks later, on January 22, Marylène was brutally murdered by a convicted murderer out on parole.

To say that this should never have happened is a significant understatement. Marylène should be alive today. She should never have met with Eustachio Gallese. Her death is tragic and utterly senseless. It is one more example of the preventable violence that women and girls face across Canada by men who view them as nothing more than objects and commodities to be bought and sold. Canadians are outraged. They have every right to be. They want answers.

The public safety minister told the House that a full investigation would take place and would be conducted by the commissioner of the Correctional Service of Canada and the chair of the Parole Board of Canada. It is an investigation that will try to answer why this senseless murder took place, and how to prevent others.

We already know the Parole Board of Canada allowed a man with a history of domestic violence against women out on day parole. He had already brutally murdered his own wife in 2004. Prior to that, he committed violence against an earlier partner in 1997. However, despite his clear history of repeated violence, the Parole Board and Gallese's parole officer made the shameful decision to sanction more violence by condoning and encouraging his perceived right to buy sex, thus signing the death warrant of Marylène. This is appalling. They should not have encouraged him to break the law.

In 2014, Parliament expressed grave concerns about the exploitation and violence inherent in prostitution through Bill C-36. Through this bill, the buying of sex was made illegal because of the harm and violence created by the demand for prostitution.

The goal of Parliament was to protect human dignity and the equality of all Canadians by discouraging prostitution, which has a disproportionate impact on women and children, particularly indigenous women and girls. The bill did not seek to reduce the harm of prostitution, but to eliminate prostitution altogether because of the violence and exploitation inherent in it.

Prostitution creates an environment of violence and inequality for women and girls, perpetuates sexual commodification and turns the most vulnerable in our society into objects to be bought and sold. That is why Bill C-36 sought to eliminate the demand by prohibiting the purchase of sex.

Countries around the world that have legalized prostitution have seen the violence against, and the murder of, those who work in prostitution. They have seen sex trafficking increase, especially among youth. This has happened in Germany, New Zealand and the Netherlands. The legitimization of prostitution normalizes attitudes of violence, misogyny and the objectification of women and girls.

Men do not have the right to buy sex, or to buy women and girls for pleasure. However, in this country, I dare say in this chamber, there are those who believe that prostitution should be legalized and that men should be entitled to buy sex and treat women and girls as commodities.

This line of thinking is heinous. It is evil, and a brazen attack on equality and the safety of all women and girls in Canada. This insidious rationale was on full display in the Parole Board's last written decision with respect to Gallese where it states, although he is single and cannot say whether he is ready to enter into a serious relationship with a woman:

...you are able to efficiently evaluate your needs and expectations towards women.... During the hearing, your parole officer underlined a strategy that was developed with the goals that would allow you to meet women in order to meet your sexual needs.

In other words, while the Parole Board acknowledged that intimate relationships with some women were inappropriate as they would be unsafe, it explicitly acknowledged his sexual needs and affirmed his perceived right to buy sex from those trapped in prostitution. In their minds, the Parole Board members were protecting some women that they deemed more valuable, while sending a convicted murderer to prey upon those who were the most disadvantaged and vulnerable.

As this tragic case demonstrates, it perpetuates the idea that there should be a class of women who are able to be purchased for sex by men who believe they have to the right to objectify and harm those who are for sale. That is what we are talking about with this case today.

The Liberal-appointed Parole Board members thought so little of those in prostitution that they were willing to knowingly put these women's lives in grave danger, women like Marylène. How else can we explain their words and actions, other than that they believed buying sex should be legal and therefore condoned Gallese's perceived right to sex as if it was legal? In their minds, Gallese's perceived right to buy sex was more important than the law.

If Parole Board members had followed the law, they would not have granted Gallese's parole for this purpose. If they had followed the law, they would have recognized the exploitation and violence inherent in prostitution instead of supporting Gallese's sexual needs. However, the Parole Board's attitudes toward women and prostitution reflect what we have seen from the Liberal government over the past few years: a clear pattern of always putting the rights of criminals ahead of the rights of victims and those at risk.

We know indigenous women and girls are the most represented victim group in sex trafficking and prostitution in Canada. They make up only 4% of Canada's population, yet make up more than 50% of the victims in Canada.

Last year the government reduced some of the human trafficking offences to summary offences, which will significantly increase the likelihood that a human trafficking offence against indigenous women will proceed as a summary conviction offence, further denying them justice. The government also eliminated the consecutive sentences for human trafficking that were adopted under the previous government. The loss of consecutive sentencing leaves victims with a continued reluctance to come forward and report a crime due to their immense fear and the psychological control that traffickers have over their victims.

In the days following this horrific case of injustice, many survivors of sex trafficking and prostitution spoke out. They are outraged and want justice for Marylène and others. I want to share with this House a few of these voices.

Trisha Baptie of B.C., a survivor of sex trafficking, stated:

[In my 15 years of involvement in the sex industry] it was never the laws that beat and raped and killed me and my friends, it was men. It was never the location we were in that was unsafe, it was the men we were in that location with who made it unsafe.

Baptie further stated that our laws must always focus on ending the demand for paid sex.

Casandra Diamond, a survivor of sex trafficking in massage parlours in Toronto, said the following:

...commodifying a woman's body is dangerous, always. It sends a message that buying someone is acceptable, enshrining the power imbalance where people from average to above-average socioeconomic status purchase other humans, mainly women and girls who have below-average socioeconomic status and power.

Timea Nagy, a survivor who was trafficked from Hungary to Canada and sold in legal strip clubs and massage parlours in the GTA, stated:

To think and promote sex work as “normal work” must come to an end. The Liberal government is completely blinded and refuses to hear our side of the story. How many more deaths will it take them to listen? 10? 20? 30?

I strongly condemn the Parole Board of Canada's decision to allow a convicted murderer to buy sex and I hope the government will also condemn this decision.

I also call on this government to stop allowing prostitution to be legitimized. Legitimizing prostitution and downplaying the seriousness of sex trafficking will lead to more violence against women and increased discrimination toward those most at risk in our country. Legitimizing prostitution creates two classes of people, those who can be commodified and sold and those who should not be.

There are some things in Canada that are just not for sale. For example, my vote is not for sale. Democracy is not for sale. People should never be for sale. Women and girls in Canada deserve better.

[Laurel Collins, NDP, Victoria, BC]

Mr. Speaker, I ask the hon. member to consider listening to the voices of sex workers. Sex workers are saying that sex work is work.

I also ask the hon. member about the Harper government's decision to implement Bill C-36, which criminalized the establishments that sex workers go to in order to feel safe and criminalized their ability to hire security. Does the member acknowledge that this is a factor in this death and many others?

[Arnold Viersen, Conservative, Peace River—Westlock, AB]

Mr. Speaker, I would respond to that by asking the hon. member across the way if it is an area of work that she has considered and if that is an appropriate—

[Some hon. members]

Oh, oh!

[Randall Garrison, NDP, Esquimalt—Saanich—Sooke, BC]

Shame. Shame on you.

[Arnold Viersen, Conservative, Peace River—Westlock, AB]

I think this makes the point. I do not think any woman in this country ever chooses this as a job. This is something women are trafficked into and something we have to work hard to end in Canada. Prostitution in Canada is inherently dangerous, and we must work hard to ensure that all Canadians have a safe place to live in this country. We do not want to see our women and girls forced into prostitution.

[Jack Harris, NDP, St. John's East, NL]

Mr. Speaker, I rise on a point of order. I listened to the hon. member's response to my colleague's question, and he made a very unparliamentary remark. He seems to be suggesting that the hon. member asked this question because she had a particular interest in a certain line of work. That is insulting and unparliamentary, notwithstanding the fact that the hon. member recognized that sex workers who are in great danger in this country are, in fact, workers.

[Arnold Viersen, Conservative, Peace River—Westlock, AB]

Mr. Speaker, in no way did I mean to affect the reputation of the hon. member in question. The very fact that I must tread delicately on this makes my point about the nature of prostitution.

[The Deputy Speaker, Conservative, Bruce Stanton]

Before we move to questions and comments, this is the second point of order we have had on this particular debate today on the opposition motion. Members will appreciate that the topic before the House brings great import and sensitivity. I would certainly encourage hon. members to be conscious of their comments in this regard.

I noted that the comments in the last point of order and the last intervention were unparliamentary, and in this particular case created some disorder. That is usually a test around which chair occupants enumerate whether there has been unparliamentary language used in the House. I would encourage hon. members to take care in how these arguments are framed. Provoking disorder in the House is certainly not something the Standing Orders permit, so I would urge care in that regard as we go forward in this debate.

Questions and comments, the hon. Minister of Diversity and Inclusion and Youth.

[Bardish Chagger, Liberal, Minister of Diversity and Inclusion and Youth]

Mr. Speaker, I have two questions for the Conservative member.

The first question is whether the member believes in the independence of the Parole Board of Canada in making decisions in the work it does, or does he think, as was the case under the previous Conservative government under Stephen Harper, that it should continuously intervene with independent institutions, including the justice system. That is my first question.

My second question is whether sex workers should have the same protections. Is this a conversation and he and his colleagues are willing to have?

We have a very serious matter in front of us. This was about victims, and it is unfortunate that we have lost a precious life. Life is precious, so would he like to have the conversation with regard to ensuring that sex workers have the protections they deserve as workers in our country?

[Arnold Viersen, Conservative, Peace River—Westlock, AB]

Mr. Speaker, to the first point, I am very proud of the Harper era of government in this country. That was part of what inspired me to run, so I do not think we have anything to apologize for there. Under Stephen Harper, the trust in our institutions, police forces and court systems went up, so that speaks to the hard work that we did.

On the second point, I firmly believe that some things are just not for sale. I said that at the end of my speech. I do not think that sex is something that ought to be bought. It is part of a healthy relationship, and I think it should be maintained in that context and not be something that is bought and sold. That is probably the fundamental difference between this side of the House and that side of the House.

[Ken Hardie, Liberal, Fleetwood—Port Kells, BC]

Mr. Speaker, the conversation we have almost started here would be a very useful one with respect to sex workers and using the term “workers” as a way of framing that activity. However, I want to go back to the question at hand.

If this goes to a committee, what sorts of things does the hon. member think the committee should be thinking about in terms of its approach to getting to the bottom of this? I can think of a number of different angles that could be pursued here, but I am wondering what line of questioning he would want to see take place if he were sitting on that committee.

[Arnold Viersen, Conservative, Peace River—Westlock, AB]

Mr. Speaker, one of the first things is that the law would be obeyed. The first lines about granting someone parole are that they will obey the law if they are out on parole.

There was one comment on Facebook about the parole officer being this guy's wingman. That is precisely where we do not want to end up. Bill C-36 made it clear that sex is not to be bought in Canada; therefore, we should have our Parole Board at least enforce the law.

[Kerry-Lynne Findlay, Conservative, South Surrey—White Rock, BC]

Mr. Speaker, it is with great concern that I rise today to speak to the motion before the House that condemns the decision of the Parole Board of Canada to grant day parole to a violent offender, which led to a young woman's murder by an inmate on day parole in January of this year, and to instruct the Standing Committee on Public Safety and National Security to conduct hearings into this matter, including a review of the changes made by the government in 2017 to the board's nomination process with a view to recommending measures to prevent another such tragedy from happening.

On January 22, our country was shocked and saddened over the news of the death of Marylène Levesque. The vivacious young 22-year-old woman was found dead in a Quebec City hotel room. Her accused murderer, 51-year-old Eustachio Gallese, brutally murdered his own wife in 2004 by beating her with a hammer and stabbing her multiple times. He was subsequently sentenced in 2006, receiving a life sentence without parole for 15 years. However, in January of this year, the Parole Board of Canada, acknowledging risk, allowed this man with a history of domestic and, I would say, sadistic violence against women out on day parole, which resulted in the death of the innocent Marylène.

This incident is beyond unacceptable and highlights once against the failure of the Liberal government's soft-on-crime approach. As everyone in the House can remember, it was not too long ago in 2018 when the Liberals fought tooth and nail against doing the right thing and putting Tori Stafford's killer back behind bars after Tori's murderer had been transferred to a healing lodge. We now have another brutal tragedy in front of us, and the Liberals' limited reactions are designed to minimize the severity of what has happened.

We are in 2020, and there is no room for such tragedy in our society. It is time for the Liberal government to assume responsibility, take action, talk less and put the rights of victims, especially vulnerable women, ahead of the sexual needs of criminals. Murderers such as Mr. Gallese should never have been given day parole in the first place, but what this highlights and what is is troubling to me are the number of inexperienced members handling such sensitive files.

Current laws on sex work, introduced by the Conservative government in 2014, clearly indicate that it is illegal to purchase or advertise sexual services. This is not about whether sex work is legitimate work; it is about a murder that was preventable.

However, when Mr. Gallese's day parole was extended last September, a Parole Board officer noted that a so-called risk management strategy was developed in order to allow Gallese to meet women, but only to respond to his sexual needs. Really?

Such lack of judgment is extremely disturbing and clearly shows how low a priority the Liberal government gives to the safety of women and all Canadians. The government's mismanagement and revolving-door prison system is costing innocent Canadians their lives. This is not high-calibre decision-making.

Canadians are the ones at risk and the ones facing the consequences of this Liberal government's failures. By letting murderers loose on our streets, the Liberals are putting many women at risk, as well as men and young children.

We all know that in 2017, several Parole Board members sent a letter to the Prime Minister warning him about the potential ramifications of changes to the process for appointing Parole Board members. However, they never got a reply. What happened instead? Many of them did not have their terms renewed and were replaced by new members with very little experience.

In fact, last Wednesday, according to two former Parole Board members, the change to the Parole Board of Canada's nomination procedures directly resulted in the appointment of members with a lack of experience and may have been a critical factor in the death of the innocent Marylène Levesque.

Over the past couple of the days, the public safety minister has told the House of Commons that a full investigation will be conducted, jointly by the commissioner of Correctional Service Canada and the chair of the Parole Board of Canada, to determine the circumstances surrounding Gallese's release.

Considering the seriousness of the current situation, bureaucrats investigating bureaucrats is not enough. We are demanding a full independent external investigation. This is a matter of transparency, security and safety of all Canadians. If the Liberal government has nothing to hide and wants to be completely transparent with Canadians, it should stop hiding behind curtains and vote in favour of our opposition day motion tomorrow.

Our criminal justice system is discredited, our security is threatened, women are especially vulnerable and it is our duty as the official opposition to hold the Liberal government to account and shed light on errors in our systems.

This is about the safety of Canadians, particularly women. This investigation should not be taken lightly.

There must be justice for Marylène Levesque—

[Arnold Viersen, Conservative, Peace River—Westlock, AB]

Mr. Speaker, I rise on a point of order. I would like to apologize unreservedly for my comments toward the member for Victoria.

[The Deputy Speaker, Conservative, Bruce Stanton]

I thank the hon. member for Peace River—Westlock for his intervention. We will not take any time away from the hon. member for South Surrey—White Rock. We appreciate, for the benefit of other hon. members, that when such occasions come upon them, it is always good, as the member has demonstrated here, to do it at the first available instance. We thank the hon. member.

The hon. member for South Surrey—White Rock.

[Kerry-Lynne Findlay, Conservative, South Surrey—White Rock, BC]

Mr. Speaker, again, this is about transparency. It is about not doing an internal look at things. It is about having an external look. We need that for transparency.

Canadians need to feel safe in their communities. Certainly in my own riding, just today the mayor of Surrey has said that his citizens are feeling less safe than ever before.

We need to have justice for the victim, Marylène Levesque. That is her name. She was 22 years old. We must look into how this preventable murder happened. This heinous crime should never happen again.

[Chris Lewis, Conservative, Essex, ON]

Mr. Speaker, earlier, a member opposite suggested that the Conservatives were trying to blame the government for what had taken place. This sounds very much like the Liberals trying to blame legal firearm owners for a crime they did not commit.

I wonder if my hon. colleague would agree that this is an extremely important issue that should not be politicized, but rather have those individuals directly accountable for their actions, such as the Parole Board?

[Kerry-Lynne Findlay, Conservative, South Surrey—White Rock, BC]

Mr. Speaker, it is very much about being held accountable for a decision that ended with the murder of a young woman. This is a serious matter.

This is not and should not be about small-p or large-P politics, back and forth. The answer given by the government several times was that it was an independent board. That is the whole point here. Yes, the Parole Board is independent, but how are the members appointed? What were their credentials? How were they chosen? What are the parameters within their job? What training are they given to do their job well?