No, but we will discuss this in committee. I am the one who proposed-
House of Commons photoWon his last election, in 2000, with 56% of the vote.
Violence Against Women December 6th, 1994
No, but we will discuss this in committee. I am the one who proposed-
Violence Against Women December 6th, 1994
Mr. Speaker, I will be brief in just saying that deterrence is an essential part of this. I am the person who introduced decisions last week increasing to four years mandatory minimum penitentiary time for anyone who uses a firearm in any one of ten serious offences, including robbery.
Violence Against Women December 6th, 1994
Mr. Speaker, I do not speak as I do because I wish to make the hon. member or any other person feel guilty. I speak as I do to make all of us together feel responsible for changing the way things are.
I do not single out white men or middle aged men or men with blond hair or any other subcategory of the population. What I am suggesting is that we must face the facts. Violence in all of its forms against anyone is unacceptable. However sometimes violence against particular groups in society is so predominant, so widespread, so ingrained in the culture that it has to be identified for particular action.
Let me tell members why I say that. In November 1993, Statistics Canada published a survey which was unique in all the world. It surveyed a huge segment of the population about violence. All members of the population surveyed were women.
They found, among other things, that over half of the women surveyed had been the victims of an act of violence committed by a man against them during their adult life. That is extraordinary.
What am I? I am a middle aged white Anglo-Saxon male. If members went out and surveyed the middle class, white, middle aged Anglo-Saxon males you would not find anything like that kind of statistic in terms of victimization of violence. Why do we not face the facts? We have a problem here. We have a problem.
The man who walked into l'École polytechnique with the Ruger Mini-14 five years ago today said something when he pulled the trigger. He said bring on the women. I want to get the women. He killed 14 of them and injured another 13. It was at random. He was not after white, middle class Anglo-Saxon lawyers. He was after women, so let us deal with the reality.
It is everywhere. May I ask the hon. member if he has seen the television programs recently, the rock videos on MTV or the commercials that peddle products? What is implicit in them is the victimization of women which is deplorable. Let's stop it. I am not doing that to make anybody feel guilty.
Of course I support the family. That is where we must begin. We must teach children from the beginning to treat other people as human beings first, not on the basis of gender.
In so far as gun control is concerned, yes, I strongly believe that those measures will help address, among other things, domestic violence. Do I say that such violence will never occur with these changes? Of course not, because we cannot make it a perfect world. But I firmly believe that they will help to make things better.
I urge the hon. member in closing to not feel guilty because it is not anyone's intention to make him feel guilty for what others have done, rather to join us in feeling responsible. Together as members of this legislature we can do something to make it a somewhat a better world.
Violence Against Women December 6th, 1994
Mr. Speaker, first of all, let me quote the message published in Quebec newspapers today:
Every citizen had to open their eyes and refuse to tolerate the various expressions of violence against women, from the smallest to the biggest, most obvious ones.
"Never again, Polytechnique!"
I have personally undertaken, as Minister of Justice, to put forward measures to counter violence.
When we are asked what the government is doing with respect to violence in society and violence against women in particular, a frank and direct answer must be that we are not doing enough.
We have taken certain steps and we resolve to take others. Working with the members of the House who have expressed so eloquently today their commitment to the principles we share and to the effort which we have embarked upon, I think we can truly make a difference through this legislation.
The steps we have taken include the changes contemplated in Bill C-42 to the regime of peace bonds which makes peace bonds easier to obtain from the court, which permit the applications for those protective orders to be made by police officers on behalf of women victims and which makes the enforcement and the consequences for the breach of such orders more significant.
I refer as well to the creation of the National Crime Prevention Council. I agree without hesitation with the comments made by the hon. member who spoke just before me about the importance of prevention in everything that we do. The National Crime Prevention Council which met for the second time in October has taken violence against women and children in Canadian society as one of its priority objectives during the coming months.
I refer as well to the family violence initiative, led by my colleague the Minister of Health, and the efforts that initiative involves to co-ordinate the actions of governments at all levels to address domestic violence toward women and children.
I refer to the announcement last week of the firearms control policy of this government and the very direct way in which it is intended to deal with domestic violence. Yesterday morning I had the honour of speaking in Edmonton at a breakfast organized to raise funds for shelters for women who are the victims of violence and for community services for such victims. I emphasized there one of the reasons why our firearms control policy is sensible. One of the reasons why universal registration is required is so that it will permit police the real tool to enforce prohibition orders where they are made in the context of a domestic dispute.
Nowadays, although prohibition orders are provided for by law, when the police officers arrive to enforce them they have no idea of what firearms are in that home. They must take the word of the occupant to determine what firearms should be taken away. That is simply not good enough. There should be a register. There will be a universal register of firearms and that will be overcome.
I can refer as well to the fact that I co-ordinate the efforts of nine ministers in the federal cabinet who work in a co-ordinated way to address the subject of violence in Canadian society generally. This includes the Minister of Canadian Heritage, for example, whose preoccupation in this context is with violence in broadcasting. It includes the Minister of Indian Affairs and Northern Development whose concern is for the incidence of violence in the aboriginal communities. Together, the nine ministers co-ordinate their efforts, working in a variety of ways to reduce and address the issue of violence.
Finally, on June 13, we tabled Bill C-41, to make a number of changes to the sentencing procedure. Under these proposals, abusing a position of trust or authority to commit a crime would be deemed to be an aggravating factor for the purpose of sentencing.
This bill is designed to provide women with further protection against the violence they suffer at the hands of persons in a position of trust.
That too will help, although none of these specific measures will be enough on its own.
There is a great deal more for us to do as a government. We must do a better job in the Department of Justice in testing and auditing the impact of all laws, particularly the criminal laws in terms of gender. What is the gender impact of changes we propose from time to time to the criminal law?
We must in the Department of Justice work harder and more urgently to resolve the issue that is getting worse by the month, dealing with the disclosure of confidential records in the course of criminal prosecutions, confidential records relating to female complainants that are subpoenaed from professionals who are treating the complainants, from confidants who may have heard the complainant make statements, from rape crisis shelters that may have helped the complainant immediately after the alleged event.
We have to find a way to resolve that issue, balancing on the one hand the right of the accused person to make full answer in defence, which is fundamental to the law, but at the same time the right of complainants not to be revictimized through the unwarranted invasion of their private affairs and what amounts to intimidation to prevent them from participating in the prosecution.
We must also grapple with the drunkenness defence in respect of which I am at work now to prepare legislative proposals for February. In many ways that is a woman's issue as well as a criminal law issue generally. It is no accident that the Daviault case involved allegations of sexual assault by a man against a women. It is no accident that the cases that occurred subsequently in other provinces too often involved allegations of violence by men against women.
As we address these challenges, as we face up to the fact that we are not doing enough and that we must do more, as we approach the remaining tasks with an enhanced sense of urgency and commitment, I urge all members of the House to participate with the government, to take on this societal imperative. Our daughters must grow up to inherit a different country, a country which expressly and as a fundamental matter of citizenship rejects violence in all forms and rejects violence against women and children in particular. That must be our goal and we must work together to achieve it.
Gun Control December 6th, 1994
Mr. Speaker, the changes in the administrative and operational practices at the border which were outlined by the minister last week will be effective immediately. Other changes in the statutes will be affected by the bill we will put
before Parliament next February. As soon as that bill is passed those changes will be in place and will be effective.
May I encourage the hon. member opposite to join with the government in these important steps that we have taken for what I know is a common objective between us, a safer country. May I encourage her and her colleagues in that party to join with us in making these changes happen.
Gun Control December 6th, 1994
Mr. Speaker, I agree with the hon. member. We made public last week decisions concerning stricter border control. The Minister of National Revenue, the Solicitor General and I announced last week that the Government of Canada will take steps to ensure that control is exercised at our borders.
The minister of revenue has announced specific changes in both operational policy and statutory amendments that will give us greater control, including insisting that all shipments of firearms coming to Canada will have permits issued in advance. Second, there will be enhanced supervision at the borders. Third, we will limit the points at the borders at which firearms may enter the country.
Along with universal registration, this will make a difference in cutting down smuggling.
Gun Control December 6th, 1994
May I emphasize, Mr. Speaker, that nothing is postponed about this plan. On January 1, less than a month from now, the order in council prohibiting a wide range of firearms will come into effect. In the calendar year 1995 we shall have legislation enacted through Parliament that will introduce the strong criminal penalties that we have announced.
On January 1, 1996 the registration system will begin. Through incitements to early compliance, we expect that the vast majority of firearms and their owners will be registered in the system in the early period after the introduction of that system.
Gun Control December 6th, 1994
Mr. Speaker, the firearm that was used by Marc Lepine in the tragic events five years ago today will, under the decisions made and announced last week by the government, be prohibited from future sale when the law is enacted and its power exercised.
We have also said that an order in council will be put in place January 1, a few weeks from now, to prohibit outright certain assault pistols and assault shotguns which will be confiscated from those who now have them.
Further, on January 1 next an order in council will be passed which will prohibit over 200 types of paramilitary and assault firearms.
It is true to say that those paramilitary firearms, as well as the prohibited handguns, will remain in the hands of those who now have them. However they may not transfer them. They may use them only until they die. They can surrender them to the police or they can disable them. That is the policy.
Gun Control December 6th, 1994
Mr. Speaker, last week in the House, we announced what we had decided to do in connection with this government's policy on firearms. We have decided, for instance, to table a bill next February here in the House, to amend the existing legislation. We have three objectives. First, we want to make it clear that Canada does not want the gun culture that exists in the United States and that we need stricter controls on firearms for society in general. Second, we want to make changes in the Criminal Code to ensure that people who use firearms to commit crimes will go to court for appropriate sentencing, and third, we want to protect the public by introduc-
ing universal registration of all firearms and thus encourage compliance with safe storage requirements.
We announced what the government has decided to do with respect to firearms, including-
Human Rights December 2nd, 1994
Mr. Speaker, that is a separate question and I understand it is separate. I am prepared to deal with that as a matter for which I am responsible, that is to say whether the Human Rights Act should be amended to add certain words. That is my responsibility.
We are dealing with commitments made by the Prime Minister and by me, not so much based on polling for support but based on principles and what is right, on fundamental justice.
The amendment which is under discussion has to do with adding sexual orientation as a ground on which discrimination is prohibited. I would have thought that on that principle, that is to say whether discrimination should be prohibited against somebody only on the basis of their sexual orientation, there is not much debate.
On the subsidiary questions, separate questions, of whether there should be same sex benefits or whether there should be this or that form of marriage, those are entirely separate. We are not proposing any amendments to deal with those. We are talking about discrimination and it is on that issue I would have thought there is not a great deal of controversy.