Michel Bellehumeur

[Supply, May 26th, 1998]

Furthermore, I am receiving applause from the Liberals, the New Democrats and the Conservatives. Something is wrong in this system.

I am coming to my question and I will be brief. The hon. member would do well to come more often to the meetings of the Standing Committee on Justice and Human Rights. We recently heard the testimony of an illustrious individual from British Columbia on a victims bill of rights and on everything the member has just said.

It was refreshing to hear someone from B.C. expressing views that are different from those of Reformers, because that province has a good system for victims. Perhaps it could be improved. If the federal government has surplus money, let it give it to the provinces to improve the system. British Columbia, like Quebec, has a good system already.

[Supply, May 26th, 1998]

Instead of yelling, the hon. member should perhaps listen to what I have to say. He would hear somewhat more balanced and realistic speeches. People would not be alarmed. The game they are playing here is a dangerous one. Crime, the judicial system and public safety are nothing to joke about. They should not be making political hay with them and they should certainly not be picking up easy votes in western Canada on such important matters. I think their remarks are outrageous.

[Supply, May 26th, 1998]

Mr. Speaker, normally a government member ought to have risen to say that what has just been said makes no sense. I cannot remain seated without commenting on such a speech.

I think I have figured out what the hon. member's problem is. Having listened to him carefully for 10 minutes, I think he is in the wrong legislature. He should be a member of a provincial legislature, because everything he mentioned relates to the administration of justice. As far as the disqualification of the judge is concerned, he may have forgotten, but he did not specify which level of court this was. It was probably a court of first instance, where the judgeships are provincial, not federal appointments. If the judge is incompetent, let the hon. member speak to the Minister of Justice for British Columbia, which is where he was appointed, but not in this place.

I think that he is comparing apples and oranges, and scaring everybody in the process. This is how prejudices are created in Canadian and in Quebec society, when people listen to these folks with their tales of the bogey man, trying to stir up fear about the Young Offenders Act, for instance.

Everything the hon. member had to say about the adjournments, the changes of court dates, the disqualification of the judge, who appears not to have done a good job, comes under provincial jurisdiction. The Bloc Quebecois members are not in agreement with this, because we respect your Canadian constitution. We may not have adopted it, or signed it, but we do respect it.

[Supply, May 26th, 1998]

Mr. Speaker, I listened carefully to what the Reform Party member had to say on this and my question is a very simple one.

Does he agree that, whether with respect to youth or the entire penal system, there are also two solitudes in Canada when it comes to the issue of crime? There is our attitude in Quebec with regard to the entire penal system, young offenders, parole, rehabilitation, and reintegration into society, and the attitude of the other solitude further west in Canada on these same issues.

Since the member was so interested in the Young Offenders Act, I wish to point out that the 66th convention of ACFAS was held during the week of May 14. This important meeting of specialists, political scientists, criminologists, and those working in the sector is held annually in Quebec to examine all aspects of crime. I will read the conclusion and I would like the Reform member to tell me whether or not he agrees that there are two irreconcilable solitudes in Canada, not just with respect to crime but with respect to other matters as well, and that we will never be able to see eye to eye.

This conclusion says “The federal proposals to amend the Young Offenders Act that were released Tuesday by the Minister of Justice reveal a growing gap between the approach to crime in Quebec and that in English Canada, particularly in the West”. This was the view expressed by Quebec researchers during the symposium on politics and social management. They conclude as follows “There are two irreconcilable solitudes; that of western Canada, among others, and that of Quebec”.

Will the hon. member at least admit that there is an increasingly wide chasm between Quebec and the rest of Canada? If so, what does he propose to prevent this chasm between the two Canadian solitudes from growing even wider?

[Young Offenders Act, May 14th, 1998]

Mr. Speaker, yesterday on the Téléjournal, her parliamentary secretary acknowledged that the statistics I have just mentioned were correct, but she said that the minister nevertheless wanted to legislate solely to calm public opinion and to look good.

Will the minister acknowledge that, as criminologist Jean Trépanier has pointed out, drafting legislation on prejudice rather than fact is neither acceptable nor responsible?

[Young Offenders Act, May 14th, 1998]

Mr. Speaker, contrary to the intimations of the Minister of Justice, who is planning to amend the Young Offenders Act, there has been no increase in violent crime in Canada in the past 20 years. In addition, Quebec, where the act is intelligently applied, has the lowest recidivism rate in Canada.

Why did the Minister of Justice base her proposed reform on demagoguery as the editorial page of La Presse pointed out this morning, rather than on facts and statistics, which speak for themselves.

[Young Offenders Act, May 13th, 1998]

Mr. Speaker, the problem is not the law, but its application, and this is the opinion of all Quebeckers involved.

Even her predecessor, the minister sitting beside her, said at the time, and I quote “The government continues to believe the youth justice system is a valid one and supports it”.

Having heard the opinions of experts and of her predecessor, how does the minister explain her shift to the right, except as a means of getting easy votes in western Canada?

[Young Offenders Act, May 13th, 1998]

Mr. Speaker, yesterday the Minister of Justice capitulated under pressure from the Reform Party and from the western provinces and toughened the Young Offenders Act even further.

If it is true, as she said yesterday in her presentation, that she borrowed considerably from the Quebec approach, why did she not manage to convince the West to accept the Young Offenders Act as it stands, and as Quebec has done successfully?

[Young Offenders, May 5th, 1998]

Mr. Speaker, because of its approach to young offenders, the federal government is clearly in favour of incarceration, according to the federal Deputy Minister of Justice.

Does the minister agree with her deputy minister that, if the Government of Quebec wants to withdraw its fair share of funds intended for young offenders, it must change its approach and favour incarceration, because, according to the deputy minister, funds are granted only on this basis?

[Calgary Declaration, May 4th, 1998]

Mr. Speaker, the minister said he went into politics to sell English Canada on the idea of distinct society. When he sees how strongly opposed Canadians are to entrenching special status for Quebec in the Constitution, does he realize that, even though he has tried to sell Quebec short, his plan is destined to fail abysmally?