Elsie Wayne

[Petitions, April 5th, 1995]

Mr. Speaker, pursuant to Standing Order 36, I rise to present a petition signed by the people from the city of Fredericton, New Brunswick.

The petition states: "Whereas human life at the pre-born stage is not protected in Canadian society, the petitioners pray and request Parliament to act immediately to extend protection to the unborn child by amending the Criminal Code to extend the same protection enjoyed by born human beings to unborn human beings".

[Partridge Island, April 5th, 1995]

Mr. Speaker, Transport Canada has declared surplus the land holdings on Partridge Island and Public Works Canada plans to dispose of the island.

Partridge Island, a small island in the middle of Saint John harbour, is a piece of Canadian heritage. It was used as a quarantine station and welcomed over three million immigrants and mariners between 1785 and 1942. Two thousand quarantined immigrants died on the island and their graves are located there. Partridge Island was designated a national historic site in 1974.

The year 1997 marks the official observance of the 150th anniversary of the great Irish famine. Saint John's Irish community will be marking the next three years on the island with special exhibits as well as an Irish homecoming and memorial service in 1997.

I, as well as the people of the most Irish city in Canada, Saint John, and the province of New Brunswick, call on this government to revisit the decision to sell this national historic site of Partridge Island. We ask that it be transferred to the Department of Canadian Heritage for preservation.

[National Defence, March 30th, 1995]

Mr. Speaker, I am greatly concerned about the recent announcement concerning changes to the Canadian forces recruitment operation in New Brunswick.

According to the Minister of National Defence he has decided to close the Canadian forces recruitment operations in Moncton, reduce the detachment in Bathurst, and move the main recruitment centre from Saint John to Fredericton.

The province of New Brunswick once again is being hit extremely hard by these closures, especially from the closure and moving of the main recruitment centre from Saint John to Fredericton.

The minister has stated that the move will save $180,000. However, does the minister realize that the move will remove an annual payroll of $1 million from Saint John? These jobs are permanent jobs that have a positive impact on the economy of Saint John, Moncton and Bathurst.

I ask the minister and the Liberal government to please stop. New Brunswick has already had its fair share of cuts in the budget.

[Questions On The Order Paper, March 29th, 1995]

Mr. Speaker, I have a point of order pursuant to Standing Order 39.

I placed a question on the Order Paper on October 4, 1994. That was 179 days ago. I am seeking information on financial assistance provided to each federal riding in Atlantic Canada by ACOA.

It is my understanding that the government tries to answer all Order Paper questions within the 45-day period. However 179 days is an unacceptable length of time to respond to my question. It indicates either an inability or an unwillingness to answer.

Would the hon. member please advise me when I will receive an answer to the question I asked over five months ago?

[Petitions, March 29th, 1995]

Mr. Speaker, the third and final group of petitions is signed by 209 people from my riding and other parts of New Brunswick.

The petitioners pray and request Parliament not to amend the human rights code, the Canadian Human Rights Act or the charter of rights and freedoms in any way which would tend to indicate societal approval of same sex relationships or of homosexuality, including amending the Criminal Code to include in the prohibited grounds of discrimination the undefined phrase sexual orientation. I concur with all of these petitions.

[Petitions, March 29th, 1995]

Mr. Speaker, the second group of petitions deal with the release of repeat sex offenders. The petitioners pray and call on Parliament to enact legislation that would enable residents to be notified when repeat sex offenders are released into the community.

This legislation would make the safety of our children a priority.

[Petitions, March 29th, 1995]

Mr. Speaker, I rise pursuant to Standing Order 36 to present three groups of petitions.

The first group deals with euthanasia and is signed by 151 people in my riding. The petitioners pray that Parliament ensure the present provisions of the Criminal Code of Canada prohibiting assisted suicide be enforced vigorously and that Parliament make no changes in the law which would sanction or allow the aiding or abetting of suicide or any activity designed to terminate human life.

[Borrowing Authority Act, 1995-96, March 28th, 1995]

Agreed.

[Electoral Boundaries Readjustment Act, 1995, March 28th, 1995]

Mr. Speaker, as a PC member I will be voting nay.

[Firearms Act, March 28th, 1995]

Mr. Speaker, I am very pleased to have the opportunity to speak on Bill C-68 which proposes to make changes to Canada's gun control system.

I support the efforts of the government in Bill C-68 to impose stricter border controls on smuggling, stiffer penalties for illegal importation and trafficking of firearms and tougher measures on criminals who use guns. I support raising of the age to buy ammunition. I fear, however, that the government is targeting law-abiding gun owners while trying to get at the criminal use of guns. That is why its approach is misguided and will not work.

Canada already has one of the toughest gun control laws in the world. It has barely begun to take effect and the government is imposing another layer of controls that will do absolutely nothing to cut down on crime or improve public safety. Under the existing gun law, applicants must obtain a firearms acquisition certificate, often referred to as an FAC for which they must take a gun course, undergo a police check and wait 28 days.

All handguns are considered restricted weapons. Owners must have an ownership permit and register them. Most handgun permits are issued to certified gun collectors, sports club members or those taking part in shooting competitions.

The private ownership of most military assault weapons is already banned or restricted.

If you want to hunt you must take a mandatory hunting course, which also covers firearm handling and safety. The current law also includes stringent storage and transportation regulations. It is an offence to breach the regulations.

This law, although it passed on December 5, 1991, came into force in stages. This means that some very major measures did not come into effect until very recently. One of those measures was the firearms safety education training course needed for an FAC.

Because many measures in Bill C-17 took effect just recently, it is too early to tell what impact they will have. Therefore, it follows that it is too early to add other controls such as a registration and licensing system which will demand even more resources and time to implement.

I fear that the government is moving too quickly and in the wrong direction with a national registration system. As a result, it is law-abiding Canadians who will end up paying from their pocketbooks and in their freedoms.

Criminals do not register guns. If you intend to commit a crime, you are not going to take your gun in and register it the day before you shoot someone. We cannot emphasize this point enough. They use stolen weapons or firearms which have not been properly registered. To assume that registration will somehow prevent or even reduce most forms of violent crimes is flawed. Creating a registration regime for firearms which are rarely used in crimes seems like a plan designed by bureaucrats for bureaucrats.

The onus is on the Minister of Justice to prove that a national registration system will be cost effective and increase public safety. He has not done that.

There is a disagreement at this time about the number of unregistered firearms in Canada as well as the ultimate cost of universal registration. Our understanding is that registration could cost hundreds of millions of dollars. Neither law-abiding firearm owners nor other taxpayers deserve to be burdened with an expensive system the minister cannot prove will cut down on crime or improve public safety.

Taxpayers could be paying for this boondoggle for decades to come. If there was any real prospect that the additional registration procedure would make a significant impact on violent crime, there would be reason to support such a plan. However, there is no convincing proof of that.

At a time when other levels of government are looking for ways to cut costs, it is absurd that the federal government is setting up a whole new bureaucracy on an expensive project whose value is highly questionable.

The government should not be punishing law-abiding gun owners when criminals with illegal guns are the real problem. I know about law-abiding gun owners because I have brothers who are hunters. My father was a hunter and I always wanted to be one, but they would not trust me with a gun so I could not go with them.

It is for these reasons that I back the notion that universal registration and licensing be considered separately from criminal sanctions and border control. I also believe the government should spend more of its energy educating Canadians about current gun laws instead of trying to impose more controls on law-abiding citizens.

There is evidence that despite some very good material on current gun laws most Canadians lack a basic understanding of the measures already in place. Before adding to the law it is essential to find out if education programs are working. If they are not, let us fix them. Because many people are not aware of the control and limits on private firearm ownership, many do not distinguish between the legal firearm owner and user and the criminal who uses guns.

It has been argued that the lack of public awareness about the existing law extends to gun owners and law enforcement officials. This prevents the law from being applied properly. It also may prevent those directly involved in or aware of dangerous situations from informing the police and preventing tragedies.

The federal and provincial governments need to sponsor an effective public education program to inform Canadians of all aspects of current gun control laws. They should at least wait to see if current laws are working before imposing what may be unnecessary limits on Canadians. Public safety balanced with the rights of legitimate law-abiding gun owners should be the guiding principle for any changes.

The minister should also remember that for many Canadians, especially aboriginal peoples and those living in the north, firearm use is a part of their tradition and culture and may be necessary for survival. For others such as farmers, hunters and sportsmen, firearm expertise is a part of the job or a legitimate hobby.

The new bill also prohibits gun collectors from leaving their guns to members of their families after death. A number of gun collectors have come to me very concerned about this. I cannot believe the minister understands any of this when he called-as he did at the Canadian Club-lawful, responsible gun owners who disagree with parts of his bill an American style gun lobby. Comments like this show he is not recognizing, let alone understanding, the reality of many Canadians.

I believe in public safety. I believe in the kind of public safety brought about by effective laws that protect the victims and punish the criminals. I am not convinced the measures in this bill will do that.