House of Commons photo

Crucial Fact

  • His favourite word was report.

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

Lost his last election, in 2008, with 38% of the vote.

Statements in the House

Criminal Code December 8th, 1994

Madam Speaker, I rise today in this House to call for the repeal of section 745 of the Criminal Code. I speak today from my own beliefs and most important, the beliefs of the many constituents of the riding of Fundy-Royal.

My riding has been concerned about the implications of section 745 for many months. Fundy-Royal residents have firm beliefs about justice. That sentiment can best be summed up in a few words: A life sentence should mean jail for life, or at least for 25 years. Under the present law that potentially has been in jeopardy.

A petition campaign spearheaded by Constable Evan Scott of the Rothesay Regional Police in Rothesay, New Brunswick calling for the repeal of section 745 has been both welcomed and endorsed throughout New Brunswick. I gave the petition my support in a May 17, 1994 letter to the Minister of Justice.

In the letter I expressed my view that to allow a judicial review for persons who may receive parole after 15 years for first degree murder, the worst possible crime in the Criminal Code, is unacceptable. I feel it is imperative to our judicial system that once an individual has been found guilty by his peers for a heinous crime that the sentence provided by the judge should be carried out in its entirety.

I have chosen to speak on this bill today because I have examined the issues surrounding the section introduced in 1976. I have balanced the merits of those arguments with the values of my constituents and I find that the present legislation is unacceptable.

The facts are staggering indeed. A criminal serving a 25 year sentence can be given a 40 per cent reduction in his sentence. Seventy-two per cent of the applicants under this section were allowed to walk out under early parole. Over the next 15 years there are approximately 600 killers who are eligible to seek early parole.

Anyone can submit an application irrespective of the brutality of the crime and at public expense these applications are permitted to be made. Therein lies part of my problem with section 745. Can we imagine the financial cost to the public purse if each of the more than 600 convicted murderers in our prisons today filed for a reduction in their parole eligibility?

Imagine with that large number of cases the series of precedents which could be created. Section 745 could become an impressive mechanism that further restricts the rights of victims.

For example, in the Queen v. Swietlinski, Judge O'Driscoll declared the victim impact statements inadmissible in a section 745 procedure because they were intended to assist in the earlier sentencing process. Therefore they were not relevant to the issue before the jury considering the criminal's application.

Public attitudes have changed since 1975. Today society overwhelmingly affirms that victims, and in the case of a murderer, the victim's family, should have a greater influence in the parole system. This belief is representative of the notion that crime affects society and the victim's family. It is no longer sufficient that the criminal's sentencing and parole be treated independently from the suffering of the victim's family.

When section 745 was drafted its primary concern was how to integrate the convict back into society as quickly as possible. The procedure to determine whether a convict deserves an early parole eligibility is much easier for the convict than a regular trial.

Let me share some examples I find troubling. The jury only needs two-thirds majority instead of 100 per cent agreement. Most of the evidence presented in the hearing comes from those who seek the convicts early release, not the victim's family.

It appears to me that the process is structured in such a manner that the welfare of the victim's family is completely ignored. If I had to choose between this system and one that gives consideration to the victim's needs to believe that justice has been done I would choose the victim's rights every time.

A thorough examination of section 745 warrants that hard questions be answered. Who is the Criminal Code supposed to protect? What is in the best interests of society? I think public confidence in the legal system is of the utmost importance in any democratic society. Is the Criminal Code to be weighted in favour of rehabilitation or the principle that a sentence for serious crimes must be implemented in full? Will criminals now realizing their opportunity to shorten their sentences by 40 per cent subvert the rehabilitation process? Will the public begin to regard 15 years as a life sentence? If this occurs the public wrath should be furious. Let us forgo that process and repeal section 745.

In closing I share the concerns of my constituents in Fundy-Royal, New Brunswick. The current method of determining a convict's eligibility must correspond with what is reasonable. Other members of this House have called for the repeal of section 745. They have often cited the high profile cases of Clifford Olsen who savagely raped and murdered 11 young children.

There is a case which occurred within my own riding. Less than two weeks ago a man who admitted he shot an innocent victim in the back 16 years ago was before a jury explaining why he deserved a reduction in his parole eligibility. When I heard about this case I hardened my resolve. I thought about the family of that victim.

For his family and for the thousands of family members who will be in a similar situation as over 600 convicted murderers apply for early parole eligibility over the next 15 years, I ask and urge that section 745 of the Criminal Code be repealed so that justice can be done and a life sentence will mean at least 25 years.

Governor General November 22nd, 1994

Mr. Speaker, it was with immense pride that I heard today in the House our Prime Minister announce that Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth has accepted his recommendation to appoint the Hn. Romeo LeBlanc as Canada's 25th Governor General. This is a wonderful tribute to a man who has served our country for so long and with such distinction.

The Prime Minister has bestowed an honour on all Atlantic Canadians, all new Brunswickers and in particular the vibrant Acadian community of North America.

On behalf of all New Brunswickers I wish to thank the Prime Minister for honouring us in this way. Romeo LeBlanc will make an excellent Governor General. He is a man possessed of unusual human strength, humour and compassion. I know his modest self-deprecating style and wit will endear him to all Canadians. He will be the people's Governor General, a man as comfortable chatting informally in a farmhouse kitchen in Sussex, New Brunswick, as he will be receiving a head of state at Rideau Hall.

The Prime Minister has made an outstanding choice. Members join me in congratulating Romeo, his wife, Diana, and their children Dominic, Genevieve, Joanna and Sarah. May God bless and keep our new head of state.

Atlantic Canada November 17th, 1994

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to say that enough is enough. I have grown sick and tired of hearing anti-Atlantic Canadian comments coming from members of the Reform Party. Not only are they attacking Atlantic Canada but they are using untruths and distortions in

their partisan attempts to pit region against region. This is unacceptable.

One of the worst offenders is the member for Fraser Valley West who has been slandering the hard working scientists and researchers at the University of Moncton's food research centre.

Out of respect for the truth, the ACOA contribution was not to make jam as the member suggested. It assisted in research and development for the small fruit industry. This R and D contributes to the development of new markets for products from soft drinks to jellies. This is no small industry to take a knock at. For example, the blueberry industry alone provides 10,000 direct jobs for Atlantic Canadians and generates $35 million in revenues.

The Reform Party members should tread lightly when they attempt to slander the business efforts of hard working Atlantic Canadians. They will never be a national party-

Literacy November 3rd, 1994

Mr. Speaker, I want to bring to the attention of the House the first national family literacy conference which is being held here in Ottawa this week, sponsored by the Movement for Canadian Literacy which brings together groups and individuals from across the country working in family literacy.

The family is the single most important social unit and that is where the serious problem of illiteracy can best be tackled.

I wish to commend the conference organizers, especially Marion Zaichkowski, the co-chair of the New Brunswick Committee on Literacy, who is participating in the work of this conference.

Today I met with the government's literacy minister, the hon. Joyce Fairburn, to discuss literacy initiatives. Senator Fairburn has been an outstanding advocate for Canadian literacy and a strong supporter of the conference and will be addressing the delegates today at the National Press Club reception at three o'clock.

I urge all members of Parliament to attend and renew their support for the government's-

Gun Control June 14th, 1994

Mr. Speaker, our office has received numerous letters, petitions and phone calls from concerned constituents in New Brunswick about speculation regarding further regulations for rifles and guns. There is a great deal of misinformation being circulated with regard to the government's intention.

The government is considering options that will address the issue in a fair and responsible matter. These include tough jail sentences for gun related crimes, increased border controls to combat smuggling, a universal firearms registration system to track gun ownership, additional restrictions on handguns, a possible ban on military assault weapons and tighter controls on the sale of ammunition.

I understand the government does not want to ban ordinary rifles and shotguns owned by law-abiding citizens. In fact the Minister of Justice stated in the House last week that he had no desire to unnecessarily inconvenience responsible gun owners

such as farmers and hunters who use firearms for lawful purposes.

I urge the Minister of Justice to maintain this rational and sensible approach on measures he will introduce to combat gun related crimes.

Committees Of The House June 1st, 1994

Madam Speaker, I have the honour to present, in both official languages, the first report of the Standing Committee on Industry, Bill C-12, an act to amend the Canada Business Corporations Act and to make consequential amendments to other acts with amendments.

Fundy-Royal April 21st, 1994

Mr. Speaker, I would like to take this opportunity to congratulate three university athletes from my riding on their recent accomplishments.

John Ryan of Sussex, New Brunswick was named male athlete of the year at the University College of Cape Breton. Dennis Lackie of Smith Creek was named most valuable player at St. Thomas University for its soccer team. David Haley of Sussex corner was named top rebounder for the St. Thomas University men's basketball team.

I would like to join with the families, friends and fans of these young athletes in saluting their success. Their dedication and team work make all three of them positive role models for the youth of Fundy-Royal. On behalf of the people of Fundy-Royal I wish them all the best in their future endeavours.

Budget Implementation Act, 1994 April 11th, 1994

Mr. Speaker, that is not the program I am referring to. The one I am referring to is an opportunity for young people to be trained in a specific area: perhaps an environmental project, a silviculture program as the lifeblood of New Brunswick is the wood industry, or some community based program. A program was recently announced for people over 50 years of age who would only be making about $8,000 on welfare. In this pilot program 1,000 individuals will be eligible to receive $12,000.

Budget Implementation Act, 1994 April 11th, 1994

Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the hon. member's comments. In fact in as many days as I have spoken in this House the Reform Party has raised the issue of the infrastructure program. I would remind the hon. member that it is the infrastructure program that is in fact giving Canadians confidence. It is the package, if you will. That infrastructure program is what is spurring the confidence.

I agree with the hon. member that small and medium sized businesses create 80 per cent of the new jobs that are created in this economy. But if the government does nothing but cut without stimulating I would suggest to the hon. member that we are going to be mired in a deeper recession than the one we are getting out of.

It is a balance. That is what has impressed me the most about this Minister of Finance and about our government, that there has been a balanced realistic approach. The cuts represent $17 billion.

I am one member who would have liked deeper cuts, faster cuts, but I have been convinced that this is a balanced approach and over the next three years we will be within 3 per cent of the GDP which I believe is responsible.

I would urge the hon. member, if he has some suggestion about what is wrong with our infrastructure program, to let us hear it. However I know a lot of people and a lot of municipalities are enjoying the benefits of the infrastructure program.

Budget Implementation Act, 1994 April 11th, 1994

Mr. Speaker, through the course of today's debate much has been said about specific elements of this budget. I would like to take a few moments to put our discussion into context by reminding hon. members that the broad direction of the budget is one that has been described by the president of the Canadian Chamber of Commerce as headed in the right direction and very specific about how to get there.

This budget addresses three vital challenges. The first is to build a framework for economic renewal. The second is to restore fiscal responsibility and the third, to ensure long term viability of our social programs.

The budget takes a balanced approach to these goals because they are the foundations for what Canada needs most, growth and jobs. This budget is the first stage in a two stage process. The direct actions taken today will be followed by extensive policy reviews leading to further action in the future.

The government has taken concrete action to meet the urgent need of creating jobs and revitalizing our economy. Canada as we all know has just passed through a difficult recession. That is why we are taking immediate action to restore consumer confidence and spur growth, action such as our national infrastructure program.

Currently in New Brunswick as in other provinces we are determining the first projects to receive funding from the $153 million to be spent in our province over the next three years. This government has also announced strategic measures to help Canada compete and prosper in the new economy. This budget, for example, takes action to assist small and medium sized businesses, the driving force behind job creation in our fast evolving economy. Measures including reduction of regulatory and payroll tax burdens as well as improved access to capital and new technology are essential for continued growth and job creation in the new economy.

In keeping with the vision of this budget the standing committee on industry has begun a study on the access by small and medium sized business to new and traditional sources of financing. In the past weeks this committee in keeping with the government's pledge to consult with Canadians has heard testimony from small and medium sized business owners from across the country.

I am pleased to note that a number of Atlantic Canadian business people have come forward to give excellent testimony on this very important subject. Small business people know how hard it is to get a modest loan and this committee wants to see how the government can help.

The budget takes decisive action to bring the deficit down now and set the country on a realistic path toward a responsible target of 3 per cent of the GDP in three years, a target that no Canadian government has reached for 20 years. We will accomplish this mainly from expenditure reductions. In this area this government is leading by example.

Bill C-17, for example, freezes the salaries of members of Parliament. Over the next three years net savings from all spending cuts will reach $17 billion. This represents the most extensive program of net spending reduction of any budget in more than a decade.

We still have work to do. Even with last week's encouraging news of the largest monthly decline in the unemployment rate in 10 years, we still have too many Canadians out of work. We have an economy where one in six children lives in poverty and where social programs that were once the envy of the world no longer

meet our different needs and have outrun our ability to pay for them.

This budget sets the stage for a historic modernization and restructuring of Canada's social safety net over the next two years. The goal of this reform is to provide modern and sustainable programs that respond to contemporary needs like skills training and incentives to work.

The budget takes a critical first step toward this broad goal by initiating concrete action in two major expenditure areas: unemployment insurance and federal transfer payments to provinces in support of social programs.

Rising unemployment insurance premiums for business are a major obstacle to job creation. The changes to UI announced in the budget will lower premiums and provide the creation of more jobs. As the president of the Canadian Federation of Independent Business said: "It is a huge incentive for small business to create business".

In the recent past federal action toward the provinces appeared to be based on a strategy of sneak attacks, confrontation and denunciation. This led to federal-provincial relations increasingly charged with tension. This budget rejects this approach. Instead it provides for predictability and modest growth in equalization transfers during the timeframe for social program reform.

Throughout the course of the reform process the federal government will work with all of the provinces to redesign our social programs. We will co-operate in studying reforms and testing new approaches with extensive consultations with the public to receive their input along the way.

In the province of New Brunswick we recently announced co-operation agreements between the federal and provincial ministers to find new ways for making a better Canada: a youth jobs strategy program at CFB Gagetown to allow young people between the ages of 17 and 24 to receive skills training in different trades; the New Brunswick job corps program which provides a guaranteed income for participants in return for volunteer services. This program is targeted at individuals over the age of 50.

As the finance minister for Newfoundland said recently, all of us and every province in this country have to be part of the solution to the Canadian problem.

The spirit of federal-provincial co-operation I have described extends beyond the budget measures relating to social security transfers. Despite the co-operative and constructive approach this budget takes toward the provinces, some hon. members have expressed concern about the regional impact of specific measures. As a member of Parliament from Atlantic Canada, I believe I can bring an important and constructive perspective to this critical issue. I say this because we in Atlantic Canada realize the scope of the national problem and we know that to correct it, tough decisions have to be made.

We know we must look forward to the new opportunities provided for in this budget, opportunities like the infrastructure program and our experimental job corps, opportunities that get business working in the proper climate to create the jobs and economic security we need for the 21st century.

We in Atlantic Canada recognize the importance of taking control of our own destiny. We are spearheading the move to lower interprovincial trade barriers and have truly free trade Canada within Canada.

In concluding, I would say that this budget has been described as a road map to the future. It takes measurable, bottom line action to help build the future opportunity and solid growth. It does so with rigour but also with compassion and creativity. Therefore I urge all hon. members to support this bill.