Gordon Earle

[Extradition Act, November 30th, 1998]

Mr. Speaker, I am very proud to have the opportunity today to speak on Bill C-40, an act respecting extradition, to amend the Canada Evidence Act, the Criminal Code, the Immigration Act and the Mutual Legal Assistance in Criminal Matters Act and to amend and repeal other Acts in consequence.

First let me speak a bit about why we are here today even debating this bill. This legislation is before us today because Canada's current extradition policies are outdated, slow and complex.

Those are three characteristics that when we are dealing with justice issues we ought not to have. In fact, the situation should be just the opposite. Matters should be dealt with expeditiously, currently and in a simple, steadfast and straightforward way.

I am sure we all can think of many delays in the justice system where we see people are suffering grievances because, as we know, justice delayed is justice denied.

I am involved in a court matter I started around the spring of 1996. It is still lingering on. Here we are in December 1998. I am sure the matter will carry on well into the new year, perhaps even close to the millennium.

I am basically a man of patience. Fortunately I have the wherewithal to finance these legal proceedings. But I often think of the many people in our society who are not in as fortunate a position as I and what they must go through when they are undergoing legal proceedings that taken that long, when the time is dragging out and the matters go on indefinitely because of our justice system.

That is one of the reasons we are here today talking about the extradition policies. They have been and they are currently outdated, slow and complex.

The bill before the House combines the Fugitive Offenders Act and the existing Extradition Act to provide a single act to simplify the extradition process in Canada. Simplify is the key word.

The proposed legislation is intended to bring our extradition policies and procedures closer to those of other countries and to prevent Canada from becoming a safe haven for fugitives who want to avoid facing the justice system in countries where they commit crimes.

One of the major concerns with the current legislation is the difficulty for Canada to meet its international obligations to a international criminal court or tribunal such as the UN tribunal on international war crimes.

Canada cannot extradite a fugitive to such a body under the present legislation. We support being able to extradite individuals to face international courts like the Rwanda and Yugoslavia war crimes tribunals.

These tribunals and the concept of an international court with independent powers to prosecute war criminals have been years in the making and certainly need our support. An important feature of the bill is that it will allow extradition not just to states but to the United Nations war crimes tribunals and any future bodies of this nature, including the UN international criminal court. The bill will enable us to fulfil our international obligations to comply with the United Nations security council resolution establishing the international criminal tribunals for Rwanda and the former Yugoslavia.

According to these resolutions we have to provide assistance and surrender fugitives to the tribunals as so requested. As our law now stands, we could be in breach of our obligations as members of the United Nations if persons sought by either tribunal were located in Canada and we were not able to extradite.

The NDP also supports measures to modernize the act and to deal with high tech and organized crime. The current legislation does not deal with the newer high tech crime and is not flexible enough to accommodate changes arising from the globalization of criminal activity. Indeed we see a lot of that happening today. We know there is drug trade and organized crime taking place globally. It is not as if now things that happen in our community are isolated from the rest of the world. Quite often these crimes originate in another part of the world and come across to our borders.

There is increased mobility of individuals today. I saw a fine example of this increased mobility earlier. I was sitting in the opposition lobby and I looked up and there was the hon. government House leader standing there talking to some of our people. I put my head down, took another bite out of my meal and I looked up and there was the government House leader in the Chamber making a speech about an emergency debate tonight. In the blink of an eye he can be one place and then another place.

This is true for hon. members of this House and really right across our society. Globalization enables us to commute from one place to another very quickly. Therefore it is very important that our legislation and our laws be able to handle situations which involve this kind of increased mobility and flexibility of individuals across borders.

We in the NDP are also in favour of the enhanced human rights protections and safeguards for persons who are the subject of an extradition request. It is very important that we treat people who are going to come to our country, if they are subject to extradition, with the same degree of fairness and justice we accord to our own citizens. In Canada we have very good human rights legislation and I was happy to see that the bill was amended to include some of those human rights issues and to take those into consideration when dealing with extradition.

Section 44 of the act states the minister shall refuse to make a surrender order if the minister is satisfied that the request for extradition is made for the purpose of prosecuting or punishing the person by reason of their race, religion, nationality, ethnic origin, language, colour, political opinion, sex, sexual orientation, age, mental or physical disability or status or that the person's position may be prejudiced for any of these reasons.

In that section we have the same basic human rights covered that we have in our human rights legislation in Canada, in all provinces. We support this amendment. We feel it is very important to carry through that kind of consistency in terms of extradition matters.

At the same time, we are concerned that while there is considerable ministerial discretion in denying extradition, there are areas that are not as legally binding as we would like, as in the case of an extradition of an individual to a state that may impose the death penalty. This was mentioned by my hon. colleague from the Bloc. If we in Canada feel the death penalty is contrary to what we see as being humanistic treatment of fellow human beings, it is equally important to make sure the same principle carries through with respect to the people we are dealing with under possible extradition orders.

We would have some concerns about the discretionary power of the minister in that regard. We feel perhaps it would be better if it were mandatory. Nonetheless, it is a step forward to at least include that consideration.

The bill allows the Minister of Justice to grant an application for extradition if she has received assurances that the death penalty will not be considered. We would like to see stronger and more binding safeguards to prevent the imposition of the death penalty.

We have some concerns about the legislation. For example, the changes permitting the admissibility of evidence not normally accepted in Canada, such as hearsay evidence. This would weaken the burden of proof for foreign nations to extradite. We feel that there has to be a high standard maintained, so we are a bit concerned about that.

The powers to exclude persons from extradition hearings in certain circumstances, the non-publication of evidence provisions and safeguards against the imposition of the death penalty, as I have mentioned, have not been made binding, and there is a possible loophole resulting from the double criminality provision.

However, even with those concerns we are supportive of this legislation. We feel it is a good step forward. It is a measure that attempts to prevent Canada from becoming a safe haven for fugitives. It enhances the human rights protections and safeguards of persons who are subject to an extradition order. As well, there are provisions for the extradition of persons to international tribunals and courts.

The act is modernized to deal with high tech and organized crime. There are provisions for the protection of young offenders and provisions for consultation between the ministers of justice and immigration in relation to refugees. This is a very important feature. Far too often within government the left hand does not know what the right hand is doing, or sometimes people take advantage of certain provisions under one department to avoid their responsibilities under another. This kind of co-operation and consultation between the ministers of justice and immigration will certainly expedite matters concerning extradition. It will make them more fair, just and appropriate.

With those remarks I will conclude. I would certainly urge members of the House to give support to this legislation, which is a good step forward.

[Balanced Budget Act, November 24th, 1998]

Mr. Speaker, I was astonished with the response by the Minister of Industry to my question of October 22, 1998.

My question addressed the government's involvement, or lack thereof, in finding solutions to the shutting down of the Bayer Lake Volvo assembly plant in my riding. The minister refused to address the issue of what the Liberal government would do to work toward saving jobs.

Volvo's abrupt announcement left 223 workers suddenly fearful for their futures and their families' futures. And abrupt it was. One Volvo worker was quoted as saying:

Few people saw it coming. Sales were up, and the quality of the product from this plant was among the best. That's what they kept telling us anyway. They all had efficiency engineers in watching us do our jobs. I guess that was so they would know what to do when they move our jobs to Mexico.

On September 29 I wrote the minister and included in my letter one suggestion for a manufacturer to replace Volvo, including an executive summary of the business plan of the company. The minister appeared to have better things to do than worry about the loss of a couple of hundred jobs in Nova Scotia.

What is unacceptable is not that the minister did not find the perfect solution but that apparently he had no interest in even trying. To make matters worse, the government shares some responsibility for the closure of the plant. The government planted the bomb, lit the fuse and walked away. It planted the bomb by deciding to lower auto tariffs, then lit the fuse with NAFTA and now it has walked away.

Thanks to NAFTA, Volvo may be producing in Mexico the same vehicles which are currently produced in Nova Scotia. I would like to read a quote from a letter I wrote to the president and chief executive officer of Volvo, Mr. Gord Sonnenberg:

I am deeply regretful of Volvo's decision to close the plant in my riding.

I certainly wish representatives from Volvo had made the effort and taken the time to work with myself, and representatives from other levels of government, our community and the employees to explore alternatives to shutting your plant down. My understanding is that your company was welcome in our community, and I know our taxation system is generous to the corporate sector.

Demonstrating the common decency of working with our community to find a solution would have been the better route.

I am painfully aware that such an increase of unemployment not only directly hurts those workers affected, but negatively impacts on us all.

I wish I could say that the Liberal government has acted better but I am afraid I cannot.

I do hope in response to my comments the government specifically addresses the issue of the closing of the Volvo plant. While the issues of auto tariffs and the impact of NAFTA are noteworthy, the real issue of substance here is this federal government's apparent disinterest in the economy of Nova Scotia.

Who knows if federal involvement may have assisted in finding a solution. But refusing to work with the community, the workers and business to find a solution can only lead to the conclusion that the government cares little for the futures of these workers and their families.

I close by sincerely offering any assistance I may be able to provide to the minister to facilitate the government involving itself in finding solutions.

[Veterans Affairs, November 24th, 1998]

Mr. Speaker, Canadians who served Canada in the merchant navy are not getting any younger. In fact, they are dying at a rate of about 12 per month. Justice delayed is indeed in this case justice denied.

The minister has indicated he will meet tomorrow with the merchant mariners. Will he commit today to use that occasion to seek a positive resolution to the compensation issue of concern to these merchant navy survivors?

[Veterans Affairs, November 23rd, 1998]

Mr. Speaker, with their return to Parliament Hill the merchant marines' fight for justice continues. It is very disturbing today to see that the concerns of the merchant navy veterans remain unresolved many years after faithfully serving their country. The current treatment of merchant marine veterans is one that I personally, and as the federal NDP spokesperson for veterans affairs, find deeply disheartening.

Just as other brave Canadian service personnel, the merchant marines served our country proudly and steadfastly. They risked their lives to transport to our armed forces the necessary provisions for war. Our merchant marines paid a high price for their service, suffering a higher rate of loss in the second world war than any other branch of the Canadian services. Yet the surviving veterans have received and continue to receive unequal treatment at the hands of this government. When it came time to serve their country, Canada's merchant marines did so with dedication and courage equal to their military comrades.

Why then are the merchant marines not receiving equal treatment in terms of veterans benefits and access to programs and services? There is no reason to continue to deny the merchant marines the rights and benefits due them. I urge—

[Division No. 265, November 23rd, 1998]

Madam Speaker, I am pleased to lend support to Bill C-53 and to join in the debate around the motions that have been put forward.

The Canada small business financing act is designed to assist small business. We in the NDP feel strongly that small businesses are a very important part of our community, a very vital part.

We believe that small and medium size businesses are an integral part of successful communities. I am sure that all of us can think of our various communities and point to many of the small businesses within our communities, whether they be construction companies, restaurants or information technology businesses, and we can see examples of people who are working hard, people who are dedicated, people who put in long hours to earn their living and to contribute in a meaningful way to our society.

I think of a small business in my riding of Halifax West, a small family restaurant. I go there sometimes in the morning for breakfast. I am served the most beautiful breakfasts, home cooked by the lady who operates this restaurant. This business creates an aura of hospitality, an aura of friendliness within the community. A lot of the local people come to that restaurant. They sit there and talk over the affairs of their community. They relate one on one with their neighbours. There is an atmosphere which is really good to see, people in the community interacting around this family business.

But it is also very noticeable that the owner of this business works very hard. She is in there first thing in the morning. She bakes homemade goods. She then deals with the customers who come in on their way to work. She is going all day. At the end of the day she has worked very hard and many long hours.

In 1996-97 small businesses created 81% of all new jobs, we are told. In 1997-98 small firms with fewer than 49 employees created 56,516 new jobs. Of the businesses operating in 1989, 51% were still operating in 1995. This is a testament of the endurance of these small businesses.

It is very important to realize that the people who operate these small businesses are people of integrity. They are people of honesty and they are people who would not necessarily take advantage of the programs that are being offered in a negative way. It bothers me when I hear Reform talking about not making things easier for people to access loans and to have help with their businesses. The inference is almost that these people will automatically take advantage of the grants and the programs available. But we must realize that most people in their small businesses are people of honesty and integrity and they are people who want to succeed. If we as a government, if we as a society, can help them, we certainly should be doing that.

It is for this reason that I urge all members in the House to give full support to the kinds of initiatives and the kinds of effort which will assist small business persons.

[Transport, November 19th, 1998]

Mr. Speaker, the future of the Halifax port is key to the future of the Nova Scotian economy. But economic development is crippled by the patronage politics of the past.

Urgent calls from business, labour and even the provincial Liberal government have demanded that the problems with the port advisory committee process be addressed. These are urgent calls that have been ignored by the minister.

Will the transport minister listen to Nova Scotians? Will he commit today to go to Halifax to hear these concerns firsthand?

[Supply, November 19th, 1998]

Madam Speaker, it always amazes and saddens me to see how a very serious subject like the health care of this nation's citizens can be trivialized by the kind of comments I heard from the member opposite. It is used as an opportunity to take swipes at another political party rather than to address the issue of the care of this nation's citizens.

It bothers me to know that right across this country our health care system is in a state of crisis. Doctors are leaving our provinces and going to the United States because of our health care system. People are on waiting lists for health care in hospitals and others are unable to afford drugs. I could go on and on.

Our aboriginal people in the north are facing a health crisis in their communities. Someone trivialized this issue by using such terms as “nasty resolution”. Showmanship I say it is. There is nothing nasty about being concerned about the care and the health of our citizens.

The member opposite asks, what does one have to do to get the message across? I would say to that member opposite, what does the public have to do, what do those in need of health care have to do for this government to realize that there is a need to come to grips with the health care problems we are facing?

[National Defence, November 18th, 1998]

Mr. Speaker, the government is in the process of trying to cut a deal with the province of Nova Scotia to sell assets associated with the Shearwater base, including land and property rights from the jetty to the airfield, including some downtown property.

It is time for the government to come clean regarding the impact of its closed door negotiations on workers in the Halifax region. How many jobs would be lost? Would any work be contracted out and if so, which jobs?

[National Defence, November 4th, 1998]

Mr. Speaker, our troops face wretched decaying conditions.

Will the minister respond quickly to improve pay and living conditions for Canada's military and, as a partial means to find funds, provide Canadians with a complete listing of all big ticket, high tech military equipment currently mothballed in warehouses across this country?

[Remembrance Day, November 3rd, 1998]

Mr. Speaker, it is with great honour and humility that I mark Remembrance Day on behalf of the New Democratic Party caucus.

Eighty full years ago from this Remembrance Day, the great terrible guns of the first world war fell silent on the 11th hour of the 11th day of the 11th month.

When the great war began in 1914, the Canadian regular army was made up of only 3,110 Canadians. Yet over 66,000 died in the killing fields of France and Belgium, with so many more deaths of our merchant mariners, our navy, the Newfoundland forces and the Royal Flying Corps.

World War II brought our death toll to over 100,000. With great pride and great sadness and with tremendous respect I recognize the ultimate sacrifice given by those killed in all wars and the terrible sacrifice also of their loved ones and their friends.

I will soon be joining these honourable veterans and other members of this House in France and Belgium to pay our respects to Canada's dead from the first world war.

This day is marked to ensure we never forget those who gave their lives for all of us. Let us never forget those veterans who suffered unspeakable horror in Korea, Japan and Hong Kong.

Let all of us in this House commit to doing all we can to ensure that those who served in our merchant marine are treated with respect and justice.

Let us recognize those who fought fascism as part of the Mackenzie-Papineau Battalion in Spain. Let us also ensure that those brave Canadian prisoners of war sent to the Buchenwald concentration camp receive the justice they deserve.

As the first black member of parliament for Nova Scotia, it is my honour to remember those who served with the segregated Number Two Construction Battalion in World War I.

As aboriginal veteran day approaches on November 8, let us also not forget the over 7,000 aboriginal Canadians who served in the two world wars and in the Korean war.

Remembrance Day is honoured by many people in many ways. My comments have already spoken to those who died and their families and loved ones, but now as a parent I believe Remembrance Day must always address our youth. It is now their lives that we need to protect through remembering war.

If anything, let this day give each of us more strength and vigour in working for peaceful and democratic solutions wherever possible.

I finish with the words gracing the tombstone of Corporal Hugh Rocks of the Queen's Own Rifles of Canada who died on D-Day, June 6, 1944 and who is buried in the Canadian graveyard at Beny-sur-Mer in France: “There is a link death cannot sever. Love and remembrance last forever”.

Our duty especially today is to remember with honour and great thanks.