Lost his last election, in 2006, with 22% of the vote.
National Defence May 1st, 2000
Mr. Speaker, the Minister of National Defence has been quite open to Canada's involvement in a North American continental defence system. Our wannabe minister of the Nobel peace prize would rather have us as sitting ducks. Since the Minister of Foreign Affairs is inactive, is the Minister of National Defence looking at an amendment to bring the Russians on line or are we looking at the death of NORAD?
Canadian Broadcasting Corporation April 13th, 2000
Mr. Speaker, I would like to follow up on my last question.
The minister of heritage will have a say in anything major like what is happening in Montreal. Would the minister guarantee community based, English language programming in Montreal for Quebec?
Canadian Broadcasting Corporation April 13th, 2000
Mr. Speaker, yesterday with regard to the possible closure of CBC Montreal the heritage minister said:
Not only have no options been made, but we have certainly discussed nothing about it.
Yet a CBC spokesperson in Montreal says the closure is an option, but I guess the government is completely unaware, even though the decision will be made in two months. Will the minister tell us why eliminating local English language television would even be an option?
Canadian Broadcasting Corporation April 12th, 2000
Mr. Speaker, if it is not proposed policy, why are they even talking about it? We know they have already considered shutting down CBC Radio in Quebec City but have backed off on that now.
My question is simple. What is the future of local CBC English media in the province of Quebec? I emphasize the word local.
Canadian Broadcasting Corporation April 12th, 2000
Mr. Speaker, here we go again with the Liberal government's slash and burn policies.
The CBC is looking at closing down English language TV studios in Montreal. Therefore local Quebec programming will be live and direct from downtown Toronto. Does that not have a nice Quebec flavour. Is this the new policy to better serve the anglophone community of Quebec?
Immigration April 11th, 2000
Mr. Speaker, today the auditor general reported that after 10 years of discussion, the departments of Immigration and Health Canada cannot decide if applicants should be routinely tested for infectious diseases.
Can the Minister of Health tell the House how many more years Canadians must wait before tests are done routinely for infectious diseases?
Immigration April 10th, 2000
Mr. Speaker, could the Minister of Citizenship and Immigration tell the House what she plans to do about the visa problem while we are waiting for the new global management system?
Immigration April 10th, 2000
Mr. Speaker, the auditor general releases his report tomorrow and is expected to address the problems that citizenship and immigration is experiencing with visas.
The new immigration bill introduces a new much needed global case management system intended to update and secure the department's tracking system. This initiative will be very expensive and the costs will not be covered in the increased budget funding. Could the minister tell the House how much this system will cost and when it could be in place?
1911 Census Records April 10th, 2000
Madam Speaker, it gives me great pleasure to rise to address the motion raised by the member for Calgary Southeast with respect to the release of the post-1901 census records.
In recent months, a number of genealogists and historians have articulated their collective disappointment that the 1911 census records will not be available for review in the public domain in the year 2003. These individuals had previously expected the 1911 census records to be made available for research purposes in this particular year because census records have been, up to this point, accessible to the public after 92 years.
However, censuses administered after 1901 fall subject to the Statistics Act that explicitly prohibits the release of all census records. This prohibition does not allow anyone to access census records for any reason; the only exception is that an individual may access his or her own personal records—but that is the only current exception.
An individual may not access the census records of anyone else, not even those belonging to his or her immediate family members, nor even those records belonging to members of his ancestral family tree.
The dilemma here is quite clear. And yet, it is quite difficult to resolve. We have two competing interests that present a difficult case for the House. On the one hand, we have the reality of statutory integrity, upon which our nation is founded and, on the other, the practical idealism presented to us by historical curiosity.
Many have argued that the release of census records is crucial to furthering the knowledge Canadians hold of their past, of their communities, of their families, and of themselves.
Access to census records is what enables individuals, scholars, researchers, and historians alike to trace their respective histories and to answer questions about their past: from questions as simple as when exactly one's ancestry arrived in Canada, to questions as nationally significant as the face of the brave men who fought and defended Canada in the first World War. Answering these questions can indeed teach Canadians a lot about themselves and about their origins.
In fact, Canadian historians have called upon these records to answer these and countless other questions which offer great insights into our history as a people. As such, the availability of census returns up to 1901 has been a tremendous resource for researchers in search of information with respect to housing, health, income, and general social conditions of the day. But, again, researchers have been able to conduct their invaluable research based upon the laws in place before 1906 which authorized the release of these census records 92 years after they were taken.
For the first time, census data will not be available to Canadians come the year 2003, the year during which census data from 1911 would have been made available in the National Archives for public reference.
Now, however, those who argue that the census records should be released to the public argue that respect for statutory integrity and privacy is important. In 1906, when the change was made that all future censuses would be kept confidential and rendered forever inaccessible, legislators made a commitment to Canadians. This commitment was that Canadians' responses to census questions would not be divulged to anyone.
The federal government currently requires Canadian residents to answer increasingly intrusive and intimate questions on its censuses. These questions included proddings into Canadians' marital status, physical characteristics, nationality, ethnic origin, wages earned, insurance held, educational attainment, and also proddings into respondents' infirmities and sicknesses.
Clearly, the government census is not an everyday survey or questionnaire—it is very involved and it can also make for quite a personal experience. In fact, census data are now collected every five years, instead of every ten, as they once were.
Most Canadians will readily answer these questions and willingly provide the federal government with the information it requests. Others will be more hesitant to divulge their personal information. Still, because the federal government requires Canadians to do so under fear of fine or imprisonment, everyone ends of answering all the questions.
Why? Why do they answer these intrusive questions? What puts their minds at ease in divulging this information? It is no more than the federal government's unqualified guarantee of confidentiality that allows Canadians to answer these very personal questions.
This guarantee is what convinced Canadians to divulge so much of themselves dating back to 1911, the guarantee offered by the federal government through the Statistics Act, and that remains the pledge the government has made to Canadians regarding their privacy. Would Canadians so willingly and accurately provide this information otherwise?
Here is our dilemma. The Laurier government promised that the information collected in the census after 1901 would remain confidential. The interesting part is no one is sure why this promise was made. Archival records indicate that the confidentiality provision was designed to reassure citizens that census enumerators would not pass along the information to tax collectors or military conscription personnel. Archival records or not, it remains unclear why these privacy provisions are in existence.
It is true that our world has changed dramatically since 1901. We have cultural values. While today we place the utmost importance on personal issues, back then according to the information, the reason for keeping census records forever confidential was the fear that information would be leaked to tax collectors and military personnel, not because they wanted to keep the information confidential for eternity. Canadians' concerns in 1906 were short term, to keep the information away from the taxman and from the military. We cannot be certain the goal was to keep information from historians.
It is of the utmost importance that we do not bar Canadians access to their history. In a relatively young country such as ours, we must do everything we can to promote and encourage our history and heritage. In so doing we perpetuate and strengthen Canadian sovereignty.
I appreciate the concern for statutory integrity and privacy interests. However, the releasing of census records after 92 years would not pose an infringement on statutory integrity nor be an invasion of privacy. After 92 years those who completed the census as adults are likely to be deceased, at which point the concern for privacy is less important.
Furthermore, Canadians today have been quite vocal in their support for releasing census records for research purposes. Given the overwhelming support for the release of records, we in the House cannot ignore the call of Canadians. This is an instance where the sensibilities of what Canadians feel is right and justifiable must be taken into account. If Canadians of today do not see the release of census records as an infringement on the privacy rights of Canadians of yesterday, then we as legislators have a duty to listen to their collective voice.
If Canadians today wish to retain access to census records 92 years after a census has been administered, then given the precedence set in the period leading up to 1911, we should accommodate them. In doing so we would be accommodating ourselves as well. Research into our history as a people and as a nation may only be furthered by allowing access to these invaluable records.
I offer my support for the motion brought forward by the member for Calgary Southeast.
Immigration April 6th, 2000
Mr. Speaker, the new immigration and refugee bill has just been tabled and many of the recommendations made by the Progressive Conservative Party of Canada are included, but there are some key points not in the bill, points recommended by me and the committee.
The first is photos and fingerprints on first contact with refugee claimants. Many of our witnesses strongly suggested this as a real means of control. The second is a safe third country. It is mentioned in the bill but that is all. This has been in law since 1988, but the government has not taken steps to negotiate the necessary agreements and the bill has no teeth to make it do it.
Appointments to the IRB are still political. This is a job that requires a very special expertise, not a political connection. Unfortunately this issue is not addressed in the bill. I hope the committee will have the backing of all parties to make proper amendments to the bill.