Jacques Saada

[Kosovo, April 12th, 1999]

Mr. Speaker, I understand from my colleague's intervention that he supports NATO's involvement in the Yugoslav republic, on the one hand. I understand that, on the other, he supports our country's humanitarian mission, but there is a bit of a paradox I would like him to explain.

He is proposing that Canada head a UN initiative to make Kosovo a protectorate. We know very well that the UN has proven totally incapable of staunching the hemorrhage that started in Kosovo long before NATO initiated its air strikes.

How is it possible to acknowledge that the UN has been unable to fulfil the role now played by NATO and at the same time ask the UN to provide a solution to the problems it could not initially solve?

The two are incompatible.

My colleague mentioned quite rightly and simply cowardice. To count on the impossibility of acting in order to assuage one's conscience would be cowardice. Seeing that the UN was unable to intervene to resolve the basic humanitarian problem in Kosovo, NATO intervened, and we supported this initiative. It would have been cowardice to say “Since we cannot resolve the problem with the UN, let us do nothing”.

[Government Services Act, 1999, March 22nd, 1999]

Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague for his intervention.

Some members of the opposition have been calling for a while for an end to the hearings by the RCMP public complaints commission and the holding of a judicial commission of inquiry in its place. Such a demand indicates a lack of understanding of the mandate and powers of the commission. It is simply not up to the federal government to call a halt to the hearings by this independent administrative tribunal. I repeat: it is not up to the government.

Established by parliament, the RCMP public complaints commission is an impartial and independent mechanism to which Canadians may direct complaints about the behaviour of members of the RCMP. The commission decided to hold a hearing as the result of complaints about the behaviour of members of the RCMP at the APEC conference in Vancouver.

The commission determined the parameters of the hearing. In December 1998, the commission named Ted Hughes, an experienced and a highly respected jurist, to hear the testimony of the complainants. The PCC will prepare a report at the end of the hearings and will publish the conclusions and recommendations of the committee. It will send this report to all complainants, to the solicitor general and to the commissioner of the RCMP.

Let me return to the mandate of the commissioner of the public complaints commission looking into complaints against the conduct of RCMP officers during the demonstrations at the APEC conference.

In fact, as the Prime Minister has repeatedly pointed out here in the House, Mr. Hughes has been given a very broad mandate. This mandate was established by the public complaints commission, not the government. As the public complaints commission said in its December 21, 1998, press release, Mr. Hughes will examine the events that occurred during the demonstrations that took place at that time and will submit a report. Mr. Hughes has already made it clear how broad a mandate this is in the decisions he has handed down.

If the public complaints commission is ever allowed to do its job, I am sure that the Canadian public will be much enlightened.

[Criminal Code, March 16th, 1999]

Mr. Speaker, the member for Regina—Lumsden—Lake Centre has asked what the government is doing to ensure that the RCMP has the resources and qualified personnel necessary to carry out its policing mandate, given that training was suspended at the Regina depot in October 1998.

As is well known, the government takes its financial responsibilities towards Canadian taxpayers very seriously. In order to be able to implement the plans necessary to be able to operate within its 1998-99 budget, the RCMP imposed a temporary freeze on discretionary spending earlier in the current fiscal year. Another temporary measure consisted in suspending any new training activities at the Regina depot.

Before resuming its activities, the RCMP decided to carry out a detailed review with respect to the alternative service delivery of all programs provided by its training centre in this division. This review enabled the RCMP to identify whether internal resources or non-members were more qualified to deliver the services now being provided at the training centre.

I am pleased to say that the commissioner recently announced that training at the depot will resume effective April 6, 1999. The RCMP will implement a more efficient cadet training program. This modified approach will allow the RCMP to attain its program objectives more effectively, while ensuring the high quality of training for which the RCMP is known the world over.

I myself can testify to this reputation. Whether at Interpol headquarters in Lyon or in Bosnia, it was brought home to me that, far from being an idle claim, this reputation was very richly deserved.

[Supply, March 16th, 1999]

Mr. Speaker, before beginning, I wish to point out that I will be sharing my time with the member for London West.

I am very pleased to have this opportunity today to debate justice issues. Before solutions can be found to certain problems, we must first ensure that the problems are correctly identified. It happens that there are a number of myths about justice, and these myths get in the way of solutions.

Obviously, one of these myths is that parole is a very bad thing because of recidivism. This is a widespread myth, but a myth nonetheless, for it is not true.

I will give a very simple example. The success rate of supervised or unsupervised temporary absences is 98%; this is not a failure. The success rate for paroles is 89.2%. I think that one would be relatively satisfied with a mark of 89.2% on a school exam.

These myths are detrimental to the entire justice debate. Over the last five years, the number of violent offences committed by inmates released on parole dropped by 70%. I repeat: the number of violent offences committed by inmates released on parole dropped by 70%.

Because of these myths, suggestions are very often made, and unfortunately I must point out that they come primarily from certain members of the Reform Party and the Progressive Conservative Party. These proposals are very simplistic: lock the criminals up for as long as possible and everything will be fine.

This is a simplistic solution. If offenders are locked up, they are not hurting the public and the public will therefore be safe. With all due respect, this is absolutely not the case, and I will explain why.

When a person commits a criminal offence and is sentenced to jail, if the jail term is used to prepare that person to better understand the world and to reintegrate it, when that individual will regain his freedom, he will behave like a law-abiding citizen. This is the best guarantee for public safety.

An inmate who is released without any preparation after spending 10 or 15 years in jail, is not at all prepared to deal with the outside world. In these cases, the chance that the individual will reoffend is understandably greater, which means the risk is also greater.

Whether the issue is impaired driving, which we are discussing right now, whether it is Bill C-251 on cumulative sentences, whether it is the bill that we just tabled regarding young offenders, the reaction of some people in this House is invariably the same, namely that we must take harsher measures, provide more penalties, impose stiffer sentences.

I submit that these are very primary reactions, which are based on myths and perceptions, not on reality. There is no doubt that there are some erroneous perceptions among the public, and that we have to correct them. However, it would be a fundamental mistake to want to use the justice system to correct such perceptions. If the perceptions are wrong, then we have to change these perceptions, not the justice system.

In this connection, I would just like to point out that I have had a number of interesting experiences since becoming the Parliamentary Secretary to the Solicitor General. In particular, I asked to sit in on a parole board hearing. This was at Laval. As it happened, the person who was entitled to apply for eligibility for parole was someone who had been given a life sentence for murder.

I listened to the deliberations, and everything was more or less predictable, except for a reference made at one point to an event that had occurred several weeks or months before, when the inmate in question had made a section 745 request to appear before the board.

A member of the victim's family was in attendance. This person turned to the inmate and said “You hurt me very much, but I forgive you”. The 42-year old inmate, a tough and hardened man, burst into tears. He wanted just one thing, to discover how to try to begin to make amends for the harm he had done.

This morning, in committee, where we are working on Bill C-251, we had a similar experience. Someone who had been found guilty of murder and has been on parole for 9 years now works with young people in order to prevent them from repeating the same serious mistakes. Is this not an initiative with the greatest chance of successfully ensuring public safety?

There are two ways of looking at things: one can take the populist approach, and then when public concern starts to build, put more people in jail, increase penalties and jail time; or one can look at the true nature of things, which is that human beings change and evolve, that they are capable of change and the more they are helped to make changes, the more they are helped to understand the constraints of society, the more they will be brought to contribute to changing our society, and the more they themselves will be in a position to help contribute to public safety.

That is our position as government. It is not an easy one in political terms. I am well aware that it is easier to say to someone “Do not worry, the criminals are behind bars. There is no problem”. Criminals do indeed have to pay for their crimes, and they must serve time in jail, and prisons are necessary because there must be retribution.

But this is not the only way. There is a combination of approaches. Prison, detention, is one, reintegration through community programs combines with that, as does awareness of community needs and the role of victims too.

Is there anything more instructive for a criminal than to face their victim? When I say face, I do not mean aggressively, but face to face. Previously, the victim had just been a number, someone they did not know. Suddenly they meet and they talk.

The criminal gets a sense of the wrong he caused his victim, a wrong in the victim's daily life and sometimes an irreparable wrong. It allows the criminal to become so much more aware and to contribute so much more or at least to have the opportunity to contribute so much more to public security.

These are not easy problems. I would really hope that we do not fall into simplistic solutions. There are no easy solutions. But if I have to choose, I believe in human nature.

[Canadian Police Association, March 9th, 1999]

Mr. Speaker, over one hundred representatives of police associations are coming from across the country to meet in Ottawa and debate matters of concern to the police community.

The fifth annual legislative conference of the Canadian Police Association provides an opportunity for direct contact with those who play a vital role protecting Canadians. Public security is important to all Canadians. It is important to the government as well.

I encourage all members to use this valuable opportunity to meet these police officers, who make a major contribution to the safety of us all. They often have to work in very difficult conditions.

As Parliamentary Secretary to the Solicitor General of Canada, I salute them.

[Luc Plamondon, March 5th, 1999]

Mr. Speaker, I would like to pay tribute to Quebec composer Luc Plamandon, who will be inducted into the Canadian music hall of fame as part of the Juno Awards night.

He will join other greats, including Oscar Peterson, Paul Anka and Glenn Gould, among others.

This recognition of the talent of Luc Plamondon speaks of perseverance and hard work over many years and demonstrates eloquently that a Quebec product compares favourably with the best internationally in both artistic and cultural terms.

In making this statement, I particularly please my daughter Jordana, a devoted fan of the work of Luc Plamondon.

There are a number of other artists to watch for on Sunday. I wish them all good luck and want them to know I am proud of them as a Quebecker and a Canadian.

[Agriculture, February 19th, 1999]

Mr. Speaker, the Minister of Finance's most recent budget contains important measures for our economy's three key sectors.

The Government of Canada will be spending $2 billion in the mining, fishing and agriculture sectors. By doing so, the government is honouring its commitments to the rural community.

In addition, let us not forget that the federal agriculture minister announced on December 10 that $900 million would be available over the next two years in response to a major concern about farm revenues.

The Government of Canada is also funding a number of programs benefiting the agricultural sector within the context of the safety net envelope.

The reason our government works for farmers is simple: the Liberal government believes there is a need to preserve and ensure the growth of agriculture in Canada, which is fundamental to our modern economy.

[Division No. 317, February 15th, 1999]

Mr. Speaker, cadet training has been suspended at the Regina depot.

I want to make it clear that this is a temporary suspension. It is temporary, because the RCMP is carrying out a detailed review of its programs and service delivery mechanisms across the country, not just in Regina, but throughout Canada, as part of its duty to manage its resources responsibly.

The RCMP must make the best possible use of its resources in order to focus on its primary mandate, which is policing.

Once the review is complete, a date will be set for the reopening of the RCMP training centre.

The RCMP is recognized the world over for the quality of its training, and our government will naturally do everything it can to see that this reputation continues.

[National Parole Board, February 15th, 1999]

Mr. Speaker, today is the 40th anniversary of the National Parole Board, and I would like to pay tribute to this institution.

It has undergone many changes over the years. Today, board members are selected by a process which determines the best qualified candidates; they are given the best possible training.

Parole decisions are no longer made in secret. Board members' performances are evaluated and they are guided by a code of ethics.

The parole board we have today is one that makes decisions in a professional manner. It enjoys an international reputation, and is made up of close to 2,000 parole officers, assisted by numerous NGOs such as the Salvation Army, and the John Howard, Elizabeth Fry and St. Leonard's societies.

I would like to take advantage of this anniversary to tell the members and employees of the board that they have every right to be proud of their accomplishments in ensuring the safety and protection of all Canadians.

[The Late Yvon Dufour, February 11th, 1999]

Mr. Speaker, today Quebec weeps at the loss of one of its great actors, Yvon Dufour, who died at the age of 68.

We watched him in Le Courrier du roy , Jeunes visages , D'Iberville , Les Enquêtes Jobidon , La Petite semaine , where he was the lead, and Le Temps d'une paix , among others.

For a person arriving in a new country, local television represents a powerful source of cultural learning. It was how I learned. Yvon Dufour contributed to it significantly. He was part of my discovery of my adopted land. Like many others and with considerable talent, he helped me better understand Quebec.

I wanted to thank him today and to pay him tribute. I offer my heartfelt sympathy to his family.