House of Commons photoWon his last election, in 2006, with 42% of the vote.
Apec Summit September 23rd, 1998
Mr. Speaker, in a free and democratic society Canadians have the right to a way of challenging the law enforcement agencies, in this case the RCMP.
That instrument, as established by the Parliament of Canada, is the Public Complaints Commission. Most of the questions being put here today are questions that would be directed to the Public Complaints Commission and I wish that the members opposite would let it get to the truth because that is what Canadians deserve.
Apec Summit September 23rd, 1998
Mr. Speaker, it surprises me that members of parliament would have such disregard for an instrument that was set up by parliament to get to the truth of this matter.
These are old questions that relate to that inquiry and they have the responsibility to let the instrument of this place do its job.
Apec Summit September 23rd, 1998
Mr. Speaker, it is because we have such high regard for the Public Complaints Commission that when it makes these requests it gets the information it asked for.
Apec Summit September 23rd, 1998
Mr. Speaker, I think the Public Complaints Commission has distinguished itself over the years quite remarkably.
In fact, Canadians have every right to the truth on this matter. Parliament, this institution, decided that the way to get to that truth was through this very organization. I really wish that they would let them do their work.
Apec Summit September 22nd, 1998
Mr. Speaker, I can only once again repeat that the public complaints commission is mandated. It is an instrument that was put forward through parliament by the former government to deal with complaints against the RCMP. If members opposite will give it a chance, it will do that in the fine fashion it has done it in for the last 12 years.
Apec Summit September 22nd, 1998
Mr. Speaker, once again my critic from the Conservative Party fails to understand this process, that the public complaints commission itself will make the decisions as to the nature of this investigation.
I have every confidence that it will do it in a way that will satisfy all our interests if we let it do its job.
Apec Summit September 22nd, 1998
Mr. Speaker, obviously the hon. member does not understand that it is not for me or the government to direct it as to what to do. It has a job to do and it will do it.
Apec Summit September 22nd, 1998
Mr. Speaker, the reality is the public complaints commission acts on the complaints of citizens. It has a wide range of opportunities to investigate and it has a good history for the last 12 years of doing Canada justice. These people should let that committee do its work.
Apec Summit September 22nd, 1998
Mr. Speaker, I think it is very important to make a distinction because a couple of questions have actually represented what I said yesterday incorrectly. The reality is the public complaints commission can call whomever it wants. That is its prerogative.
Questions On The Order Paper September 21st, 1998
With respect to the Ministry of the Solicitor General, the answer is as follows:
(a) The National Parole Board made the following number of pardon decisions:
1994-95—25,502 1995-96—16,981 1996-97—19,269
(b) The National Parole Board granted the following number of pardons:
1994-95—23,895 1995-96—15,401 1996-97—17,529
(c) The National Parole Board revoked the following of pardons:
1994-95—269 1995-96—416 1996-97—498
(d) The National Parole Board denied the following of pardon applications:
1994-95—228 1995-96—172 1996-97—184
(e) There are no statistics available regarding the issue of pardons by offence type.
(f) There are no statistics available regarding the revocation of pardons by offence type.
(g) There are no statistics available regarding the denial of pardons by offence type.
Question No. 97—