Dave Batters

[Parliament of Canada Act, November 21st, 2005]

She only crossed to become a cabinet minister.

[Controlled Drugs and Substances Act, November 16th, 2005]

Mr. Speaker, it is indeed a pleasure to speak on behalf of the residents of Palliser to Bill C-248, which is a very innovative and bold step by the member for Prince George—Peace River. The purpose of the bill is to amend the Controlled Drugs and Substances Act, to impose minimum prison sentences of one year for a first offence and two years for a subsequent offence in cases where a person is convicted of trafficking in a controlled or restricted drug or narcotic within 500 metres of an elementary school or high school.

That sounds perfectly reasonable to me and it is perfectly reasonable to most Canadians watching this evening. The member for Prince George—Peace River clearly is concerned, as am I, and as are my colleagues the member for Wild Rose and the member for Regina—Qu'Appelle. I could list every member on this side of the House. We are deeply concerned about these issues. We are concerned for our kids in Canada. That is what the bill is about, a concern for families, support for law enforcement officers and a desire to see justice in Canada and the protection of victims and in this case the would-be victims.

I have been pushing the government on the issue of rescheduling crystal meth. For many months I have pushed to have crystal meth moved from schedule III to schedule I to enable judges to impose harsher sentences on those convicted of trafficking in crystal meth. Most members and most Canadians know that crystal meth is a menace in our society. Of those who take crystal meth for the first time, 85% become addicted. It is truly a terrible threat to our communities and our citizens.

I have met with parents, young addicts, police officers, community volunteers. I have seen the effects of the drug. I have received letters from some constituents. I will not share the contents of those letters, but suffice it to say they had rivetting stories of the impact the drug has had on their family members and friends. The stories are terrible beyond words.

With this bill the member for Prince George—Peace River seeks to protect children at school. The schools need to be sanctuaries for kids. They need to be temples of learning, whether it be Peacock, Central, Vanier or Riverview collegiates in Moose Jaw or Sheldon-Williams Collegiate in Regina, or elementary schools. Sadly, some predators prey on children younger than those in grade 9. They are in our elementary schools or outside our schools. Make no mistake that those people are predators. They have not simply made a mistake. Drug dealers prey on our most vulnerable citizens, the future of this great country.

We need to have some deterrence. Many members came to the House to reform our criminal justice system. We need to have some tools. The government needs to provide some deterrence. Our laws need to provide some deterrence against this type of activity, drug dealing to children near schools. Perhaps the best way to prevent people from preying on young people near our schools is with minimum sentences, with jail time. When people are incarcerated for dealing drugs to children we know that temporarily they are not going to be dealing drugs to kids. That may be the best form of prevention.

This should be a no-brainer, but many Liberals opposite have already spoken against the bill. I was surprised to hear some of the comments by the member earlier against minimum sentences. It should be a no-brainer, but it is not really surprising given the government's record of being soft on crime. It is soft on drugs.

We have seen the government's plan to decriminalize marijuana. That is something that certainly no police officer in this country wants to see. Police realize that marijuana is a gateway drug. Someone does not simply wake up one morning and say, “I think I am going to do crack cocaine today,” or “Today is crystal meth day”. It is a gateway drug.

It is just amazing. The government just does not get it. It took many months to reschedule crystal meth and the impact on individuals and families was huge in this country. The government has not yet acted to restrict the precursors, the key ingredients for crystal meth and that needs to happen. It is not surprising though, given the government's approach to crime.

We could go on about the $2 billion gun registry. The Liberals continue to pour good money after bad into a flawed plan that has not saved one life or prevented one crime involving firearms. They are supported by the member for Toronto--Danforth and the NDP in throwing the money away instead of putting it toward front line policing, education, drug awareness and treatment. These are all critical components.

The government has not protected our children by raising the age of sexual consent to 16. It thereby passively condones adults having sex with children who are 14 years old. Again the Liberal government, which has been in power for 12 years, has not protected Canadian children from predators, which is what we are trying to do here today. Conditional sentences for serious crimes, even violent crimes, is the record of the government opposite.

The member for Prince George--Peace River said that the bill is about health, mental health, education, social welfare and the future we offer our nation's children. He realizes that education and awareness are key components of what we need to do to stamp out predators and the drug problem in our society. He said that just as it would be a recipe for failure to combat drug use in our schools without education and awareness, and relying solely upon punishment and enforcement, so too is it ineffective to educate and inform without adequate enforcement. In fact, the government's own national drug strategy called for effective enforcement, but it has to have some teeth. It cannot just be empty promises like we are accustomed to hearing.

The Minister of Health is against this legislation. The member for Prince George--Peace River went out of his way to say he wanted to make it clear to members of the House that the legislation is targeted toward adults who intentionally seek to sell drugs to children or minors. He stressed adults.

The Library of Parliament synopsis of the purposes of sentencing is comprised of seven main aspects, which include deterrence through the fear of punishment for the crime and punishments against reoffending, something that Bill C-248 certainly does address.

I said earlier that perhaps the best way to ensure that predators are not preying upon Canadian children in schools is by incarcerating them so we know that they are not out in society. A prison sentence actually enables those individuals to get some rehabilitation. We can rehabilitate individuals and certainly we are not against that, but there needs to be some deterrence. We do not have to go far to know why.

Talk to the families of those people who are affected by crystal meth. Look into their eyes. Talk to police officers and community leaders about what crystal meth is doing to our kids, to our society and the future of this country. We are at war with drug dealers in this country. Maybe it is time to start treating it like a war and take some firm steps to ensure that individuals can no longer prey upon our children.

In August the Conservative Party formed a task force on safe streets and healthy communities. This task force travelled across Canada to meet with a broad cross-section of people, including victims of crime, community workers and front line law enforcement officers. Our goal is to gain a better understanding of the emergency crime issues facing our nation. I am very proud to be part of a party that has delved into these issues.

Let us hope all members do the right thing and send this bill to committee. They should consult with their constituents. If they do not vote for it and send it to committee, they will have to explain that to their constituents.

[Equalization, November 15th, 2005]

Mr. Speaker, rectifying previous mistakes is not a fair deal for the province of Saskatchewan. The finance minister has again slammed the door on a fair equalization deal for Saskatchewan. Saskatchewan cannot afford to wait, yet the finance minister has delayed any deal until next year. This will cost the people of Saskatchewan over $750 million in lost revenue. Apparently, he has been too busy trying to buy off Canadians with their own money.

Why has the finance minister again failed to deliver a fair deal for Saskatchewan?

[Privilege, November 14th, 2005]

Madam Speaker, I thank the member for pointing out the exact page in the report of the Lafleur example, the lengthy report detailing Liberal corruption and the culture of entitlement. I did not have that with me today.

We were supposed to wait for Gomery. The Minister of Public Works constantly said that we should wait for Gomery. We have seen it and phrases such as “the cronies club”, “the cigars club”, and “the culture of entitlement”. I thank the member for bringing all this forward to the House today.

The residents of Palliser, the good people in Regina, Moose Jaw, Caronport, Wilcox and Mossbank are sick of the club. They do not want to be in the club. They want good honest government, which is what the leader of the official opposition is ready to deliver as soon as we go to the polls, hopefully not over Christmas but that is up to the Prime Minister of Canada.

[Privilege, November 14th, 2005]

Madam Speaker, the member certainly would know where the money came from. In studying his finances in his electoral district association of Cypress Hills—Grasslands, his Conservative association, he would know exactly where that money came from and which good honest Canadians had sent in $50 or $100 to help the good member get elected to this honoured place.

As the member for Palliser, I know exactly when someone has made a donation to the Palliser Conservative Association. It is completely within the rules. A receipt is issued from Elections Canada. I know exactly who has given what money to help me in my efforts in the Palliser Conservative Association to send good honest representation to Ottawa. If I were to receive $50, $100 or $200, I would be thanking those individuals personally by calling them or sending them a card.

The member alluded to the fact that the current Prime Minister of Canada plotted for years to take over and become leader of the party opposite. The members opposite who have sat in the House for a long time will remember that when he left cabinet--and one has to wonder why that happened--he was holding cabinet meetings at the same time as the then prime minister, Mr. Chrétien. He was taking over the Liberal Party of Canada riding by riding by riding, knowing who the power players were. He would know how much money was in the kitty and how much was there to fight election campaigns.

We are talking about millions of dollars in this scandal. The Liberals themselves admit that $1.14 million was stolen from Canadian taxpayers. It had to show up somewhere, and it showed up in the coffers of some of the electoral riding associations. The members opposite smile, but Canadians are not smiling. They are outraged. This money showed up in their kitties to run election campaigns. It is dirty to the core. The Liberals cannot paint themselves as victims in this scandal. The victims are the taxpayers in this country, in Palliser, in Cypress Hills—Grasslands. It is terrible.

[Privilege, November 14th, 2005]

Madam Speaker, I would hearken back to my original comments that it is very difficult to see members of the Liberal Party opposite as victims in this whole scenario. The only victims are the Canadian taxpayers.

The member wanted a yes or no answer. When there are countless money envelopes and millions of dollars flowing under restaurant tables, who knows exactly who was involved?

The member for Bourassa opposite sat in the cabinet at the time this was being discussed, as did the Prime Minister of Canada. He was there when they hatched the whole sponsorship program. It is about the wilful blindness. Who knows who knew what, opposite. Justice Gomery has sorted through this sordid affair. He has used words like “rotten to the core” and “culture of corruption”. It is really difficult to see the members opposite as victims. The member for Bourassa sat in when all those discussions were taking place. I will end by saying that I guess some of the truth hurts.

[Privilege, November 14th, 2005]

Madam Speaker, I hope that time is added on because I still have many things to say. Canadians are very interested in having laid out for them, not the Liberal version, but the real version of what went on.

The sponsorship program has divided this country like nothing we have seen before. It is the biggest gift the separatists have ever received. Former prime minister Chrétien almost presided over the breakup of Canada in 1995, and the Liberal government and the current Prime Minister are threatening the unity of this country like nothing we have seen in the history of Canada.

Let us talk about what the Prime Minister knew about the sponsorship program. He sat in a cabinet retreat in 1996 when the Liberal Party hatched the sponsorship program, so he has to accept his share of the blame.

The people in my riding want to know when they will see some justice. They want to know when they will see Liberals sent to jail for their horrendous abuse of tax dollars, money laundering and fraud. These are not little things, but relatively speaking, it is the little things that have incensed people. I am talking about things like Mr. Lafleur who paid his son $245 an hour to pack boxes. How many people in Moose Jaw, Saskatchewan have jobs that pay $245 an hour to pack boxes? None. People work very hard to send their money to Ottawa, not to have it funnelled to Liberal friendly ad agencies or to take care of Liberal friends in Quebec, or funnelled into the Liberal Party of Canada to fight election campaigns and shape the outcome of elections. It is shameful. The Liberal Party has said that it is going to clean up things. Let us look at whether it is cleaning things up.

The Liberal MP for Honoré-Mercier, who is also president of the Quebec wing of the Liberal Party, said on November 2 that the Prime Minister's announcement was in part a symbolic one. Seven of the 10 individuals named by the Prime Minister's Quebec lieutenant, the transport minister, are not even members of the Liberal Party, yet Liberal members made a big thing of saying they would be stripped of their memberships. Seven of the 10 are not even members of the Liberal Party.

Let me get back to the member for Bourassa's question of privilege about householders and mailing privileges.

On May 3 the member for West Vancouver--Sunshine Coast--Sea to Sky Country raised a question of privilege after Liberals sent franked mail of a partisan nature into his riding. That franked mail cost 50¢ an envelope, just like it would cost normal Canadians to send mail. It was sent to every household in my colleague's riding.

The member for Toronto--Danforth has sent franked mail to every household in my riding. This franked mail is not like a 10 percenter which costs a minuscule amount in comparison, maybe 5¢ a copy. Franked mail costs 50¢ an envelope. People in Moose Jaw and Regina and the rural part of my riding were outraged at this abuse of taxpayers' dollars. This is not the intent of our mailing privileges. The intent is not to send franked pieces of addressed mail at 50¢ a pop into other members' ridings. The member for Toronto--Danforth should be ashamed of himself.

Justice Gomery has confirmed that there was political direction in the sponsorship scandal. The evidence has been accepted that envelopes of cash were sprinkled through Liberal ridings in Quebec with political direction. Both ad agency executives and senior Liberal deputy ministers have been named. As the Prime Minister stated, there was political direction for this whole sordid affair.

Canadians are asking themselves which politicians are responsible. They will only find that out when the leader of the official opposition sits on that side of the House as the prime minister of Canada.

It is interesting to note, and the people of Canada know this, that the Prime Minister called the Gomery commission only after he was caught. That is a key point.

I will quote a respected Canadian, Mr. Rex Murphy. On the CBC program The National on November 2 he said:

If two years of ad scam, plundering the public purse, reigniting separatism, confusing their party [speaking of the Liberal Party] with our government, and wounding the very system of politics itself doesn't argue it's time for a change, it's time to question why we bother having elections in the first place. Ad scam was institutionalized theft via the party in power [the Liberal Party of Canada].

Rex Murphy went on to say, “That's some platform for a fifth term”. He obviously said that quite facetiously, tongue in cheek.

Let us talk about how we are going to clean up Ottawa. Canadians want to know there is a bright side to this and that we are going to clean up Ottawa.

The Leader of the Opposition has announced that his first piece of legislation as prime minister would be a new federal accountability act which would, among other things, ban corporate and union donations while limiting personal donations to $1,000. Individual Canadians would determine who would be their government, which is a wonderful innovation.

The Leader of the Opposition in his federal accountability act would ban ministers, their staff and senior public workers from lobbying government for five years and would give more power to the lobbyists registrar, Ethics Commissioner, Information Commissioner and the Auditor General. Canadians can be very thankful for the role of the Auditor General.

The Liberal Party used the sponsorship program to enrich Liberals and finance Liberal campaigns. The Conservative Party's accountability act would end the influence of big money in Ottawa and would crack down on a lobbying culture that has thrived under the current Prime Minister.

The government exists to serve ordinary Canadians who work hard and play by the rules. Those in government must serve the public interest, not their own personal interest.

[Privilege, November 14th, 2005]

The member is obviously upset about the chauffeur comment.

Palliser residents want Liberals in jail and only a Conservative Party government will ensure that those accused are charged and prosecuted to the full extent of the law. This, of course, is for the RCMP to handle. Again, we need to have a punitive component. It is not enough to simply repay the money that was stolen and slipped under the table in brown envelopes.

We in the Conservative Party of Canada are ready to face the electorate at any time and put our record and the honesty and integrity that exists with the Leader of the Opposition and this entire party against the members opposite who are steeped in corruption.

The sponsorship program--

[Privilege, November 14th, 2005]

Yes, the guilty ones will go to jail and there will be a lot of them.

It has been confirmed by Justice Gomery that there was political direction of the sponsorship program. This culture of entitlement is confirmed. Mr. Dingwall perhaps said it best when he stated, “I am entitled to my entitlements”. That is the attitude that exists among the Liberal members opposite. Justice Gomery specifically admonished the Liberals for equating the interests of the Liberal Party with those of national unity, and Canadians deserve better.

What people in my riding and Canadians throughout the country know is that even though some people were not directly fingered by Justice Gomery, a lot of wilful blindness went on. It is tough to track envelopes of money passed under the table in restaurants. There was a lot of wilful blindness on the part of members opposite and on the part of the Prime Minister of Canada.

It is clear that Liberals received kickbacks. The Liberal Party itself admits that it will repay $1.14 million that it stole. Since when do people in this country get to choose their penalty? Where is the punitive component if people just have to repay the money that was stolen? Clearly the government needs to step forward, do the right thing, sue the Liberal Party of Canada and recover the money.

Again, there needs to be a punitive component. If Liberal members opposite robbed a bank, they would not just have to give back the money bags. This is ridiculous. The Bloc Québécois puts the number of dollars that went directly to the Liberal Party of Canada at closer to $5.5 million. If truth be told, $40 million are unaccounted for. Canadians are incensed by this scandal.

What did the Prime Minister know about this scandal? I sat in my seat and watched as the Prime Minister of Canada one day was asked a very simple question: Did he ever have lunch with Mr. Claude Boulay of Groupe Everest and discuss sponsorship contracts? He refused to answer that question probably a dozen times, until a long term member of the House, I believe from Ottawa Centre, said that it was the most disgraceful thing he had ever seen in the history of this Parliament. That indicates some of what the Prime Minister may have known.

We know that when the Prime Minister was finance minister, his chief political aid, Lucie Castelli, picked up the phone and secured $250,000 for Serge Savard, the Prime Minister's golfing buddy who happened to raise $1 million for the Prime Minister's leadership bid. Did the Prime Minister not know about that? Canadians will be the judges of that. The people in my riding have already made up their minds based on sworn testimony and are ready to render their judgment.

Justice Gomery has used words such as “culture of entitlement” and the phrase “rotten to the core”. Clearly there is systemic corruption in the Liberal Party of Canada, the result of arrogance of a four term Liberal government. There is terrible abuse of Canadian tax dollars. The good people in Moose Jaw, Regina, Pense, Wilcox, Mossbank and Rouleau, hard-working taxpayers in this country, are incensed. The government needs to be held politically accountable. The Liberals may think that Canadians will simply forgive and forget but they will be wrong.

In 1997 the Liberal majority resulted perhaps because of the illegal money that helped the Liberals increase their seat count in Quebec. This money was used to illegally fight election campaigns. It breaks every rule in the book and Canadians know it.

I will paraphrase the member for Newmarket—Aurora. When she sat on this side of the House she said that the Prime Minister was the first mate on the good ship Chrétien before she decided to join that ship.

Canadians know that the Prime Minister was the finance minister and the vice-chair of the Treasury Board at that time. He was the one writing the cheques for the sponsorship program which has become the sponsorship scandal. Canadians will judge in the coming election what the Prime Minister truly knew about this scandal.

It is the culture of corruption. How many examples do we have to point to? Let us talk about the strippergate saga and the Dingwall affair with questions about his lobbyist activities. Let us talk about the misuse of the Challenger jet by the government. It is shameful. Let us talk about the immigration minister's ferocious appetite for pizza and the $138 bill for two people, which is more than a family of four spends in a week for groceries. Let us talk about the Minister of Foreign Affairs and his travelling chauffeur if we want to talk scandal. Let us talk about crony appointments to the Senate. Let us talk about André Ouellet from Canada Post. I can go on and on.

[Privilege, November 14th, 2005]

Madam Speaker, the member for Etobicoke Centre talked about the important initiatives the government apparently has on the books which are of pressing importance. What Canadians and my colleagues in the Conservative Party of Canada are wondering is that it has been 12 years and if these initiatives were so important why have we not seen them. These important initiatives, according to the Liberal Party, include such things as the decriminalization of marijuana. Certainly no police officer that we talk to in this country wants to see that.

Canadians clearly are ready to render judgment on the government and the Conservative Party of Canada is ready to take immediate actions to address the real needs of Canadians.

The member for Acadie--Bathurst talked about the importance of voting, and I cannot emphasize that enough. I agree with him. It is extremely important for everyone to be motivated to vote in the upcoming federal election. It is important that we clean up this culture of entitlement and corruption that exists in the party opposite and let everybody know here today that, with the developments currently going on in Ottawa, if there is a Christmas campaign, the blame will rest on the shoulders of the Prime Minister of Canada and no one else.

I am very proud to rise today on behalf of the good people of Palliser to speak to the question of privilege put forward by the hon. member for Bourassa. The hon. member for Bourassa has asked that we no longer be permitted to discuss Canada's most important issue of the day, the sponsorship scandal, with Canadians. It is a tragedy that this is the important issue that is dominating the news but that is a tragedy of the government's making.

The Gomery report has not even looked at other scandals, other things that need to be delved into, such as the Prime Minister's contracting practices at Earnscliffe, which is the only area where it has been suggested that there may have been direct involvement in improper activities.

It is very difficult to see the members opposite and the member for Bourassa as victims, which is the way they portray themselves. The only victims in this entire mess are Canadian taxpayers, good, honest, hard-working people who send their money to Ottawa and want it to be used to address their priorities of health care, front line policing and a new equalization deal for Saskatchewan, a fair deal that would allow my province of Saskatchewan to retain its oil and gas revenues that rightfully belong to the people of Saskatchewan which only the Minister of Finance is against. Of the entire province of Saskatchewan, provincial representatives and federal representatives, only the finance minister refuses to stand up for the people of Saskatchewan. These are the issues people would like to see debated.

Those are the priorities which Canadians want their taxpayer dollars to go toward. Therefore it is difficult for Canadians to see the members opposite as victims. The member for Bourassa paints himself as a victim but it looks like the member for Roberval--Lac-Saint-Jean has hit a nerve and I guess some of the truth hurts.

Let us be very clear. Justice Gomery confirmed in his report that millions of hard-earned taxpayer dollars were stolen from the public treasury to benefit the Liberal Party of Canada. That money should have been put into the priorities of Canadians. Leaders of the Liberal Party must be held politically and democratically responsible. When we are fortunate enough to have the members on this side of the House on that side of the House, we can finally clean up this mess and ensure that guilty parties are prosecuted and people are charged and prosecuted to the full extent of the law. People in my riding would like to see Liberals go to jail for this scandal and that is when they will be satisfied.