Herb Gray

[Justice, October 24th, 1995]

Mr. Speaker, Correctional Service Canada is mandated by the law to carry out the sentence imposed by the court. The courts have held on many occasions that if there is negligence in the way that it is done, then there is a cause of action for negligence.

That is what happened in this case. The inmate was taken as a hostage. He was beaten with an iron bar. He sued for $60,000. The settlement that was advised as a result of a pretrial conference by the presiding judge was not $60,000; it was $12,000.

There is no reward for murder or for acting illegally. It is simply a matter of following the precedents in previous cases.

[Justice, October 24th, 1995]

Mr. Speaker, the individual in question sued Correctional Service Canada for negligence after being seized as a hostage by other prisoners and beaten with an iron bar.

He sued for $60,000. When the case came to court, there was a pretrial conference and the presiding judge strongly urged that the case be settled. The case was then settled for $12,000 of which about $8,000 went to the inmate's lawyer.

This was a step that was taken in light of the advice from the presiding judge. The court indicated that a settlement was in order and this is what happened.

[Government Appointments, October 23rd, 1995]

Mr. Speaker, the position was the subject of a public advertisement. Candidates submitted applications. The applications were reviewed by the chair of the parole board who carried out an interview process and made recommendations. It was on the basis of competence and merit that the decision was made.

[Points Of Order, October 20th, 1995]

Mr. Speaker, with the utmost respect to the hon. member, he should read the section of the act before asking his question. It makes no reference to any power of the minister to give any direction to the chair of the board or any member of the board.

[Points Of Order, October 20th, 1995]

Mr. Speaker, during question period I was asked a question by the critic for the solicitor general from the Reform Party, the member for Calgary Northeast. He alleged that in section 135 of the Corrections and Conditional Release Act the solicitor general is empowered to direct the parole board to cancel or suspend parole.

I have before me section 135 of the act. I see no reference whatsoever to any power of that sort given to the solicitor general. It says rather that this power can be exercised by a member of the parole board or a person designated by the chairperson of the

board. The chairperson of the board is not the minister. I therefore ask that the member for Calgary Northeast have an opportunity to correct the record.

[Justice, October 20th, 1995]

Mr. Speaker, I would be very happy to carry out the duties given to me by Parliament.

It is my understanding that the parole board operates at arm's length from government and from parliamentarians. Having said that, I will be happy to review the act and see what should and could be done under the terms of the law passed by Parliament.

[Justice, October 20th, 1995]

Mr. Speaker, the law passed by Parliament creating the parole board set it up as an independent organization, an administrative tribunal operating at arm's length from the government. The law I referred to does not give the Solicitor General of Canada any authority to intervene in the decisions of the parole board.

However, I will be happy to make sure the hon. member's concerns are brought to the attention of the board.

[Business Of The House, October 19th, 1995]

Mr. Speaker, we will continue this afternoon with Bill C-105 which ratifies a number of international tax conventions.

I understand there have been discussions and as a result all parties have agreed to complete debate on this bill at all stages in the House of Commons. I thank the other parties for their co-operation in this regard.

When that is completed we will then proceed with second reading of Bill C-107, the British Columbia Treaties Commission bill. I expect that will carry us into tomorrow or even Monday of next week. When second reading of Bill C-107 is completed, we will then call report stage of Bill C-93 respecting cultural properties.

I will want to examine what further legislation is reported from committee before I set the program for after Bill C-93 is completed.

[Business Of The House, October 5th, 1995]

Mr. Speaker, I am surprised the opposition House leader does not consider major measures with respect to public safety like witness protection and updating our parole system and improving the system of regulation of transport as serious and important.

The hon. member and his colleagues have fully participated in these debates. I think the public will agree, even if he does not, that we have had and will continue to have a serious and important legislative program.

Our priority today and tomorrow will be third reading stage of Bill C-64, the employment equity legislation. I wonder if he is saying to one of his colleagues he does not consider that an important bill. If this bill is not completed when we adjourn tomorrow we will resume its consideration on October 16.

Following that, we will call Bill S-9 involving the U.S.-Canada income tax convention, followed by any other bills that have been or are about to be reported from committees. A number of bills are in the late stages of consideration in committees and we hope to have them reported soon.

We will then call second reading of the bill creating the Law Commission of Canada to be introduced tomorrow, followed by the tax convention legislation that was introduced this morning.

I am pleased to give this statement of the important and substantial government business, the balance of which we will be calling for this week and after we return from the break for Thanksgiving.

[Ipperwash, October 5th, 1995]

Mr. Speaker, I said very clearly that I and the federal government are ready to act. All that is required is for the town council to go to the Ontario government and if the Ontario government says it cannot handle the matter, then we are ready to step in. If my hon. friend does not realize that simple fact, then he is not doing his job.