House of Commons photo

Crucial Fact

  • His favourite word was fredericton.

Last in Parliament September 2008, as Liberal MP for Fredericton (New Brunswick)

Won his last election, in 2006, with 42% of the vote.

Statements in the House

Dna Identification Act October 29th, 1997

moved:

That Bill C-3, an act respecting DNA identification and to make consequential amendments to the Criminal Code and other acts, be referred forthwith to the Standing Committee on Justice and Human Rights.

Mr. Speaker, as this is my first opportunity to speak with you being in the Chair I would like to congratulate you. I know you are going to do a great job. I enjoyed very much our working together in the past.

I am pleased to speak today to the motion to refer Bill C-3 to committee before second reading. Bill C-3 provides for the establishment of a national DNA data bank. The DNA identification act will make Canada one of only a handful of countries in the world to have a national DNA data bank. I am also pleased to inform the House that with this groundbreaking legislation we have reached a major milestone in the government's safer communities agenda. Forensic DNA analysis has been instrumental in securing convictions and has also helped to exonerate wrongly convicted individuals. It has already proven to be one of the most accurate methods of obtaining solid evidence in criminal investigations. However, DNA analysis also raises important privacy concerns because it has the potential to reveal much more about a person than does the analysis of a fingerprint.

Given the scope of the issues surrounding the use and potential misuse of DNA profiles and samples, we want to ensure detailed and careful study of this legislation. The introduction of the DNA identification act marks the second phase in the government's DNA strategy. The first phase was implemented in July 1995 when amendments to the Criminal Code were passed to allow the police to obtain DNA samples from suspects in criminal investigations with the use of warrants.

With those provisions now firmly in place we are now creating the legal framework for storing both the biological samples and using the identifying information that they hold. It is another concrete step toward protecting Canadians from violent criminals. I wish to share what has been done to bring us to this point.

The former solicitor general began a process of consultation in January 1996 with the release of a DNA consultation document to various groups and individuals across Canada. Input was sought on several key issues, such as whose DNA profile should be banked, under what circumstances and whether biological samples should be retained.

Last year consultation sessions were held across the country and written comments were received from over 70 respondents. The results of those consultations were summarized in a report that was released in February 1997. A tremendous amount was learned through this process. The consultations indicated strong support for the creation of a national DNA data bank. However, a number of concerns were raised in relation to privacy and charter considerations associated with the collection of biological samples and the storing and use of DNA profiles.

The views of those who participated in the consultation process have been carefully considered. We are confident the bill strikes the appropriate balance between privacy and charter concerns and our goal to do more to protect Canadians from violent crime.

The national DNA data bank will be an important tool that will help police link a suspect with evidence left at the scene of a crime. It will be much easier for police to identify repeat sex and violent offenders and help eliminate innocent suspects in the course of their investigations. Combined with the DNA warrant legislation, which is already in place, the ability to store and later retrieve DNA profiles will shorten investigations and help prevent further victimization from repeat offenders. It is the next logical step to ensure that the warrant legislation is used to its fullest potential.

I will briefly explain how the proposed data bank will work. Biological samples will be collected from offenders convicted of designated criminal offences. These include the most serious personal injury offences, including homicide and sexual offences. Young offenders will be treated in the same manner as adults with respect to the taking of DNA samples for the purposes of data banking. The DNA extracted from the sample will be analysed with the resulting profile entered into a convicted offenders index in the data bank.

The DNA data bank will also contain a crime scene index that will contain DNA information retrieved from unsolved crime scenes. The data bank will be established and maintained by the RCMP. It is very important to note that access to the DNA profiles contained in the convicted offenders index and to the samples themselves will be strictly limited to those directly involved in the operation of the data bank.

The benefits of using such a system are numerous. Police will be able to identify and arrest repeat offenders by comparing DNA information from a crime scene to the convicted offender's index. They will also be able to determine whether a series of offences was committed by the same offender or whether more than one perpetrator was involved. Police will be able to cross-reference and link DNA profiles to other cases within and across jurisdictions.

Using DNA profiles will help focus police investigation by more quickly eliminating suspects whose DNA is already in the data bank in a case where no match with the crime scene evidence is found.

Finally, we anticipate that the knowledge of DNA testing to solve crimes may also deter offenders from committing further offences.

We are keenly aware of the significant privacy concerns associated with the bill, particularly in relation to the retention of biological samples. Strong arguments have been advanced by the scientific community indicating that in its view the retention of biological samples is essential for the DNA data bank to be able to adapt to technological changes in the future.

We are aware that the field of forensic DNA analysis is developing rapidly and forensic scientists have told us that as the technology evolves the DNA profiles of today are likely to be come obsolete later on. If samples are retained, they can be reanalysed using new technology, thereby ensuring that Canada's data bank is able to keep pace with technological advances.

The bill includes strict prohibitions and criminal penalties in relation to any misuse of either the samples or the information contained in the samples. However, despite the safeguards included in the legislation there continue to be concerns regarding the retention of biological samples.

I believe there are compelling arguments on both sides of the issue and this is one of the reasons why I am asking the House to refer the legislation to the justice committee prior to second reading to allow for detailed study and full public debate.

To conclude, there is no doubt that over the past few years we have made enormous progress in our efforts to contribute to a safe, just and peaceful society. The addition of forensic DNA analysis and the ability to store DNA profiles will help us target those who commit the most serious crimes and hold them accountable.

Canadians can continue to enjoy the safety of their streets and have a sense of security knowing that police forces across the country have access to one of the most sophisticated tools worldwide.

I urge hon. members of the House to support the motion to refer Bill C-3 to committee prior to second reading.

Prison System October 29th, 1997

Mr. Speaker, I can only say after the fact that it has not been established that the hotel is a hangout for biker gangs. In fact, the RCMP, the municipality and the mayor of the community have all said that. It is very unfair to that gentleman that these people would impugn his reputation with nothing more than that.

Prison System October 29th, 1997

Mr. Speaker, I would bring to the member's attention that the director we are talking about just recently transferred 12 biker offenders from his institution to maximum security. Two Hell's Angels challenged that transfer. Last Friday the court found in favour of the director and the biker gang members were transferred to maximum security. I do not think that suggests he is in league with the biker gangs.

Airbus October 29th, 1997

Mr. Speaker, the government settled the damages for Mr. Mulroney because a superior court judge in the province of Quebec said we had to. It was binding arbitration.

Prison System October 29th, 1997

Mr. Speaker, it has to be established that the issue is whether the hotel we are talking about is a haven for biker gangs. It is not. Four very reputable law enforcement agencies have established that is not the case. I think it does a disservice to a 30 year veteran of the correction service to make such allegations.

Prison System October 29th, 1997

Mr. Speaker, it is very important to point out that yesterday the members from the Bloc made some serious allegations. They referred to this hotel as a haven for biker gangs and Hell's Angels.

We have worked diligently since yesterday to find out if we could confirm that. We have called the Sûreté du Québec, the RCMP, the municipality and the mayor. The allegations that were put have not been established. I think it is shameful that a 30 year veteran of CSC would be put under that light.

Penitentiaries October 29th, 1997

Mr. Speaker, we have had repeated questions for two or three weeks now, none of them based on fact.

I bring to the attention of the House that there are no tattoo parlours. We are looking for gloves for people. Labour Canada has been in to visit the kitchens in Kingston and there is no problem. The inmates in Kingston do not have keys to their cells.

We cannot take these questions seriously.

Penitentiaries October 29th, 1997

Mr. Speaker, as usual the member is not accurate.

Correctional Service Canada October 28th, 1997

Madam Speaker, I wish to table a news release that was issued as a joint statement by the Union of Solicitor General Employees and Correctional Service Canada dated October 24.

Correctional Service Canada October 28th, 1997

Mr. Speaker, I believe Canadians are more interested in when the party that pretends to protect the employees does not listen to what they tell it to do. Stop inflaming the situation with these wrong accusations when you claim to be doing it in the interest of the employees.