Myron Thompson

[Young Offenders, April 19th, 1994]

Mr. Speaker, unfortunately I will probably have to ask the same question about a new case. How many people have to die before this government will realize the legislation they have had in place for 16 years is useless? It is time to act.

This Young Offenders Act is inherently flawed. Any amount of tinkering this government will do will not fix it. We need completely new legislation for young offenders.

Will the minister replace this legislation? Will the minister scrap the act?

[Young Offenders, April 19th, 1994]

Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Minister of Justice.

In Edmonton on April 17 in the early hours of the morning a young couple, ages 36 and 37, with their two children, ages 9 and 6, were wakened by a noise. The mother, thinking it was one of her children, went to investigate. Three young offenders had broken into their house. When she confronted them they promptly stabbed her to death.

When is this minister going to act by sending a clear message to violent young offenders that the experiments of the seventies were a failure and they will be treated henceforth as the vicious criminals they are?

[Young Offenders, April 11th, 1994]

Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Minister of Justice.

Last week Nicholas Battersby, a young man from England, was gunned down on the streets of Ottawa by several young offenders. Canadians are sick and tired of inaction.

When is the Minister of Justice going to move beyond talk and when is he actually going to do something? When is the minister going to reform the Young Offenders Act? What is the hold-up?

[Aids, April 11th, 1994]

Mr. Speaker, it was recently brought to my attention by a concerned school librarian that the student body was in possession of a pamphlet entitled "Doing it in the 90s". This pamphlet was produced by the Canadian Aids Society in co-operation with the University of Toronto and Laval University.

It details the results of a survey administered to gay and bisexual men. The results explain how men have sex, whether they practice safe sex, why they do not wear condoms and whether they have been tested for AIDS and various AIDS related diseases.

I personally have no trouble with educating the public about the risk of AIDS. However, when a group of school children is able to get hold of a document with such graphic references to homosexuality and bisexuality, we have to question three things. How did it get a hold of this document? What are the benefits in the published information? Could our tax dollars, $500,000, not be spent more effectively through proper AIDS educational material, not advocating homosexuality and bisexuality and the practices associated with them?

[Business Of Supply, March 17th, 1994]

Madam Speaker, I listened with great interest to the speech of the hon. member. I was anxious to hear it. At first I was under the impression that she was a newly elected member such as myself who has been here for only a little while. Shortly after listening to the beginning of her speech I began to realize that she was not a newly elected member because she was running on with the rhetoric we have heard over and over from various members who have been here in the past.

It is the same kind of thing we hear constantly. Things are going well. We have a great system. We do not need changes. She was making statements that had nothing whatever to do with the motion before the House but was suggesting that the motion states that a fair trial for criminals should be eliminated.

On searching the motion I cannot see anywhere it suggests anything like that. We are trying to say that in a number of cases, and it is an unlimited number, we have evidence that the rights of the victim are being overrun by the rights of the criminal.

I would ask the member the same question which I referred to earlier. To give a lady in Montreal peace of mind, to give her the ability to continue the healing process she is going to have to go through after being raped a number of times by an individual, she requested the perpetrator be tested for AIDS so she could at least eliminate that from her worries. The courts in our system ruled that the criminal did not have to submit a sample to determine if he had AIDS and the request from the victim was denied.

Had the hon. member been the person to make the choice I would like to know if she would honour the request of the victim and have the criminal tested for AIDS or would she make the decision the court made, that the criminal did not have to submit under his rights under the charter.

[Supply, March 17th, 1994]

Mr. Speaker, I believe the crown acts for the state. If we take it down to an individual case, we have a different ball game. When we talk individually we talk about (a) one person, the criminal, and (b) person number two, the victim.

I referred to a conflict where a person was a rape victim, requested an HIV test and that request was denied to protect the rights of the criminal. I can give lots of examples. I have a whole briefcase full of them. That is difficult to do in 10 minutes. If every member of this Parliament has been paying attention to what is going on out there, I am sure they can find case after case.

Another examples is a fellow by the name of Thompson-no relation. When in prison he stated that he was going to kill his estranged wife when he got out. He was going to eliminate her and others associated with her. He stated that over and over. The victim, the lady in question, requested the authorities to please not let him out as he meant it. Nothing was done about her request. They simply followed the line of the rule: He was up for parole and was eligible because he had been a good boy and he really did not mean it. However, we will request that he stays in Toronto and does not go out to the west coast.

Big deal. He got to the west coast and he accomplished his mission. Three people are dead because nobody listened to the potential victim.

That is not asking too much. I am sure the hon. member will agree that if we ignore the wishes of the victims as we have in the past and only concentrate on the straight legal legislation, we are doing a disservice to our people.

[Supply, March 17th, 1994]

Mr. Speaker, I thank the hon. member for his question.

The cases I cited are sample cases of an extremely violent nature where there is a direct conflict between the rights of the criminal and the rights of the victim and it has always gone toward the rights of the victim.

I did not talk about incarceration other than the fact that when we have those kinds of dangerous people on the street they should be locked up. Does that mean we throw away the key, not feed them and not treat them? I did not address the penal system. I will be more than pleased to give another 10 minute speech on what I think we should do there.

I believe in rehabilitation. I believe that we need to treat and do as much as we possibly can, but I also believe that we have to be realistic in our penal system, realistic enough to realize that across the way or anywhere the world, if we work hard and earn money, we probably will eat pork chops and steak and will love it. If we go out into the same world and do not work and are not able to achieve as much as some other people, we may have to resort to something less than that.

Maybe in a realistic sense that is part of the treatment that needs to take place in the penal system. Let us provide a work program. If one works hard in this penal system it will be like in society, one will eat well. If one does not work in this penal system, one's reward will be the same as in society. One will eat macaroni and cheese and may not get any cheese.

[Supply, March 17th, 1994]

Mr. Speaker, I would like to approach the motion from a different angle. I support the motion and I want to talk about the healing process victims must go through.

Because of legislation and certain things that seem to take place in our government the healing process is hindered a great deal. This motion is intended to help-and I believe it could-a great deal in the healing process. The thing I fear about raising a motion in the House is that it seems like, in my short four months, that if a Reformer from the west stands to speak about a motion he or she has to be one of those ultra right redneck scoundrels. We should be careful about what how strongly we say things. At the same time a person like me could stand and think of experienced individuals on the opposite side of the House who have been here for a number of years. I could attach the name Liberal to them, but I have to be cautious that I suddenly do not think I am trying to talk sense to some people who are nothing more than bleeding hearts and surely it will fall on deaf ears. Those extreme attitudes should not exist. I hope somehow or another we can pull those attitudes together and address a motion which I believe is essential to helping victims.

I refer to the specific case of a lady in her mid-forties, a mother of three children. I may not have all the facts straight, but I know about the case. She was apparently working in the church secretarial office on a Saturday. An intruder came in and apparently beat the lady severely, raped her a number of times, and caused a great deal of havoc in her life. By the way, the perpetrator was out on a day pass. Apparently he had been incarcerated in the past for the same kinds of charges.

This lady went through the turmoil and trauma of the event. She is scarred the rest of her life, physically to some degree but certainly mentally to a larger degree. This will impact on the lives of her family, her children and her husband, over the years. I realize they are seeking help and would like to do something about the healing process.

The victim in this case would very dearly like the criminal tested for HIV-AIDS since he comes from a high risk category. That is a very simple request. It comes from the heart. With all the other traumatic things they will have to live with, they would certainly like to be able to eliminate that thought. When it reached the courts under the Charter of Rights and Freedoms it was declared that he did not have to submit to an HIV test, to protect his rights.

In a nutshell the motion is trying to address those kinds of situations. It is not that the criminal should not have some rights. However, if the situation is going to create a conflict, for heaven's sake let us use common sense and help the healing process to take place in the lives of this woman and her family. We should demand that criminal be submitted to this test and eliminate that problem or worry, or at least give them the opportunity to do something about it.

It is a conflict between the rights of two individuals. We constantly see these conflicts in our judicial system. The circumstances are not the same but there are similarities. We must consider the rights of the criminal and the rights of the victim. In practically every case the criminal's rights override the rights of the victim. The particular case I have just illustrated would probably be the worst example of saying to a victim: "We are sorry but we cannot do it because of his rights".

This is not a simplistic solution. It is a common sense solution. For the life of me I cannot understand why any government would say that it is going to take ages to resolve these problems. They could be resolved overnight if there is the political will to do it. These problems do not need to exist. We could wipe them out if we developed an attitude in the House that regardless of where the motion comes from it makes sense.

Recently I had the opportunity to visit for a length of time with a mother in the city of Calgary. She was the victim of violence in that her five-year old daughter was taken from her backyard where she was playing. It was not until later that night

that the young girl was found. She had been mutilated, beaten, her throat cut and dumped in a garbage dumpster in an alley behind their home.

An arrest was made of a 37-year old man who admitted to the crime. He was quoted in the papers as saying he had a difficult time controlling himself because he was sick and tired of this little girl always coming on to him. Everyone in the House must agree that some pretty traumatic things are taking place in that family. This little girl had brothers and sisters as well.

Immediately the 37-year old man had a lawyer to provide legal assistance. There was nothing for the victim. Immediately the 37-year old man had psychologists, psychiatrists and counsellors at his disposal. There was nothing for the victim. There was nothing for the mother. I take that back. There was something for the mother. She could have the same services but she had to pay $50 to $100 an hour out of her own pocket.

When we asked for help to be provided to this family we were brushed aside. We do not have anything in legislation that would allow for this to happen. The boys on the great white hill in Ottawa have not come up with anything in the charter of rights to protect victims.

I cannot for the slightest moment believe anybody would not want to vote in favour of a motion that would protect the rights of victims like the ones I am talking about. It is high time we did it.

My last point is why have we not brought in some legislation that would help tremendously? It has been proven throughout many countries, parts of the States and other parts of the world, that we could legislate DNA testing. There would be some real value in that. It is my understanding that it is incorrect one in thirty billion times. In samples of skin, hair, semen or whatever the case may be, no two people in the world can have the same DNA with the possible exception of identical twins.

It would be a useful tool for our enforcement officers to apply for a conviction and, believe it or not, to have someone released who was wrongly charged.

It is has been reported to me that in British Columbia there are 45 unsolved murders, 20 sexual assaults and several other serious crimes where DNA evidence is available, but there is no law that allows them to make a suspect give a sample. A sample cannot be taken from the suspect because under the Charter of Rights and Freedoms the criminal has the right to refuse the test. I could go through several examples. Consequently there are people walking the streets who ought to be behind bars.

Do we have the political will or the courage to stand and allow the people of our country to have the right to be safe from people who would be behind bars if we took the proper action? The first step is to recognize the rights of victims.

[Supply, March 17th, 1994]

Mr. Speaker, I would like the hon. member to comment on a couple of things in regard to crime prevention of which I am a strong supporter regardless of what some people might say. I am also a strong supporter of punishment. I believe in both ends of the spectrum.

I like the idea of setting up the national council. The minister suggested some ideas of who should be members of this council. I did not hear the possibility of there being members from Victims of Violence, from the good old grassroots, the farmer who never had anything more than a grade six education, or the ordinary Canadian. From his speech it seems it could be stacked with people who have the class and the ability to speak rhetorically, as we hear so much, and yet do not get to the root of the problem. Would the government consider including all kinds of people on this council?

Second, on the children at risk program, I tried to implement that program in the school where I was principal. We had a great deal of success with it at the beginning but that success deteriorated. It was hindered because parents complained that we were attempting to move in on certain children without their permission although they were targeted. Under the Charter of Rights and Freedoms we virtually had to withdraw and therefore could not provide any help. The charter was a hindrance to the program in my view.

I would like the hon. member's comments on those two points.

[Supply, March 17th, 1994]

Mr. Speaker, I will try to make my statement very quickly.

Nobody on this side of the House including myself disagrees for a moment that prevention has to have a high priority in our system of dealing with people, particularly when it comes to crime.

I want to get down to the grass roots, down to the level of things. How is this government finally going to answer? I say finally because I have been involved in this since the early 1970s and even before when I was mayor of a town and crime was a serious problem.

I am thinking particularly of violent crime. When is the government going to come forward with something for the seniors I talked to on a radio talk show in Calgary, which is certainly not a renowned city of crime in comparison with others, who say they are scared to death. One lady said she lives alone with her cat and she is scared to death every night that somebody is going to tear her door down, bash her head in and steal all her belongings. They live in fear.

In rural communities you see bars on the stores and on private homes. Law-abiding citizens lock themselves in to try to protect themselves from what is on the street on the loose.

During the lifetime of this 35th Parliament, we are going to have 80 parole hearings. My research shows 80.

If we have a record like we have had in the past I fear for a lot of people. Our research has already provided approximately 40 names of people who have been released on parole who have killed a high number of people. One of those persons who got out of jail said before he killed four other people: "The only thing crazier than me is a system that allows me to get on the street and do what I did".

We hear this from the criminals themselves. We hear it from the victims. When is the government going to quit the rhetoric and get down to the grassroots, talk to the people who are suffering and listen to what the victims of violence are saying and do something about their causes and concerns?