Lost her last election, in 2006, with 39% of the vote.
Health February 6th, 2002
Mr. Speaker, the Department of Health is not hiding this information. We are well aware of the reports of adverse reactions. Those adverse reactions are being followed up on.
Let me reassure the hon. member that we are well aware of the concerns of those who suffer from diabetes and those who are concerned about adverse reactions to synthetic insulin.
The Department of Health will continue to monitor the situation and will take whatever steps are necessary in the future.
Health February 6th, 2002
Mr. Speaker, I think we are all aware that diabetes is a complex and difficult medical condition. In essence, its effects vary from person to person. I am certainly very much aware of the concerns expressed by those who have suffered adverse reactions to synthetic insulin.
I want to reassure members of the House that animal insulin continues to be available in this country as well as synthetic insulin. The product monograph in relation to synthetic insulin clearly indicates various possible adverse reactions. Let me reassure every--
Health January 30th, 2002
Mr. Speaker, let me reassure the hon. member that at this point no final decision has been made in relation to any of the labs we operate across Canada.
I think the hon. member is probably aware that we have had an expert, Dr. J. Mayer, review the operation of our DAS system and we are reviewing his recommendations. Our goal is to ensure the highest quality and most efficient drug analysis service to Canadians.
Justice December 14th, 2001
Mr. Speaker, as the hon. member knows, we believe our new youth justice legislation is balanced, is effective, is fair and permits the province of Quebec to continue the very good programs and activities that it has under way.
Impaired Driving December 7th, 2001
Mr. Speaker, the hon. member raises a very serious question for all of us as the holiday season approaches. In the last year for which we have statistics, 1999, 906 innocent people lost their lives due to impaired drivers. The government has taken action in Bill C-82 and Bill C-18.
Let me say that, with the co-operation of all parties in the House, we are introducing a new amendment to the criminal code that will involve ignition interlock devices. These devices have been used successfully in provinces like Alberta and Quebec. Today's legislation will ensure that we keep more impaired drivers off the road, thereby saving lives.
Criminal Code December 7th, 2001
moved that Bill C-46, an act to amend the Criminal Code (alcohol ignition interlock device programs), be read the second time and referred to a committee.
Mr. Speaker, members of the House will recall that I indicated in question period on June 12 my interest in bringing forward legislation related to ignition interlock devices as early as this fall. Today I am very pleased to speak to the bill that fulfills this commitment.
I would first like to take a few moments to explain how an ignition interlock device works and how it is an important prevention and rehabilitation tool in the fight against drunk driving.
Where a vehicle is equipped with an ignition interlock device under a provincial program, a driver must provide a suitable breath sample before the vehicle will start. If the analysis of the sample shows a blood alcohol concentration above a prescribed level, the vehicle will not start. At periodic intervals the driver is alerted to stop and provide further breath samples for analysis. The device records the date and time of all samples and the result of analysis.
The existing provincial programs do monitor each device's log. This monitoring occurs each time the interlock equipped vehicle is taken for its interlock maintenance appointment.
In 1990 my home province of Alberta became the first Canadian jurisdiction to pilot a program for repeat offenders who use an ignition interlock device. The province of Quebec introduced a similar program in 1997.
Alberta was the first jurisdiction in North America to offer a program for the use of an ignition interlock device throughout the jurisdiction. An evaluation has shown that offenders on the program in Alberta have lower recidivism than offenders not using an ignition interlock device.
Ignition interlock devices are one part of the combination of measures that can be brought to bear upon the serious health, safety and social issue of impaired driving. The Traffic Injury Research Foundation recommends the combination of ignition interlock device programs and mandatory assessment and education or treatment for convicted impaired drivers.
I am informed that many federally prohibited or provincially suspended drivers will drive while disqualified. Some will never try to re-enter the legal driving system with a valid provincial or territorial driving licence.
An ignition interlock device program extends control over many who would otherwise be in this group and provides monitoring that offers public protection. Such programs can also contribute to the rehabilitation of offenders by modifying impaired driving behaviour, particularly when combined with other measures such as education and treatment.
In May 1999 the Standing Committee on Justice and Human Rights tabled its report on impaired driving, to which it attached a draft bill. The government adopted the measures found in the committee's draft bill and passed Bill C-82 as amended in June 1999.
Among the provisions in Bill C-82 was one that raised the criminal code's minimum period of driving prohibition on a first impaired driving offence from three months to one year. For a second offence the minimum was raised from six months to two years. For a subsequent offence, the minimum period of driving prohibition was raised from 12 months to three years.
Only for a first offender is there a possibility to drive after serving a period of absolute driving prohibition of three months, if the offender is under a provincial program for the use of an ignition interlock device during the remainder of the period of driving prohibition.
While the standing committee's recommendation limited the restricted driving authorization to a first offender who is under a provincial program for the use of an ignition interlock device, the standing committee's report was favourable toward wider use of ignition interlock devices in order to provide public protection and to offer meaningful deterrence to individual offenders.
Experience in Alberta and Quebec has shown ignition interlock devices to be effective.
However, with the 1999 increase in the minimum period of driving prohibition under the criminal code, they have found it difficult to attract repeat offenders to the ignition interlock device program. There is currently no ability to have a second offender use a provincial program for ignition interlock devices until a minimum two year period has expired. For a subsequent offender the minimum period before which an interlock program may be used is three years.
In 2000 the criminal law section of the Uniform Law Conference of Canada unanimously passed a resolution from Quebec. It called for an extension to all impaired driving offenders of the possibility to drive after serving a period of absolute driving prohibition if the offender is under a provincial program for the use of an ignition interlock device for the remainder of the criminal code's period of driving prohibition.
The proposed amendments would permit a judge to authorize a second offender to drive after serving an absolute driving prohibition of six months if that person is on an ignition interlock device program operated by a province or territory for the remainder of the prohibition period. In the case of a subsequent offender, a judge could authorize the person to drive after serving an absolute driving prohibition of 12 months if that person is on an ignition interlock device program operated by a province or territory for the remainder of the prohibition period.
This approach follows the path taken by parliament with respect to first offenders in 1999. It combines a punitive element, namely the period of absolute driving prohibition, with a longer rehabilitative period of prohibition during which the offender may only drive a vehicle that is equipped with an ignition interlock device.
The provinces and territories determine whether to issue a provincial-territorial driving licence. Each province or territory may decide whether it wishes to offer the possibility of an early return to driving with a restricted licence that requires the use of an ignition interlock device. Some provinces may choose to require offenders to serve the full period of federal driving prohibition and the full period of provincial-territorial driving licence suspension before they are allowed or even compelled to drive with an ignition interlock device. Others may choose to offer a reduction in the provincial-territorial driving licence suspension if an ignition interlock device is used after the criminal code's absolute period of driving prohibition is served and during the remainder of the code's period of driving prohibition.
I had the opportunity to meet with Louise Knox who is president of Mothers Against Drunk Driving and other representatives of the organization MADD on November 26. The representatives of MADD told me that the ignition interlock provisions of the criminal code should be expanded to encourage all impaired driving offenders to participate in an interlock program whether they are first or repeat offenders.
I do not view ignition interlock devices as a magic bullet for the impaired driving problem. However in combination with other countermeasures such as education and treatment they are an important tool in the fight against impaired driving. I look forward to my colleague's support for this important proposal which I believe in some part will make our roads a safer place.
Criminal Code December 6th, 2001
moved the second reading of, and concurrence in, amendments made by the Senate to Bill C-24, an act to amend the Criminal Code (organized crime and law enforcement) and to make consequential amendments to other acts.
Terrorism December 3rd, 2001
Mr. Speaker, let me reassure everyone in the House that while the French criminal justice system is different from ours, we have nothing but the greatest respect for the way the French run their criminal justice system.
In fact we have received a formal extradition request from the French government and we will be proceeding in relation to their extradition request in a timely fashion.
Terrorism December 3rd, 2001
Mr. Speaker, the hon. member should know that my lawyers were in court fighting the bail application on the part of Mr. Ouzghar.
We have to respect the decision of the court in this case, but I do want to reassure Canadians that the court imposed very stiff conditions on bail in relation to Mr. Ouzghar.
Justice November 29th, 2001
Mr. Speaker, as I have said, the government is working not only here at home but abroad to deal with the problems and the horror of child pornography.
In fact we could have had laws in place protecting our children further against child pornography had the opposition and others not stonewalled the passage of Bill C-15. Months ago we could have had new laws in the country protecting our children. They should look at themselves.