Jim Hart

[Division No. 230, September 29th, 1998]

Mr. Speaker, I think Canadians in general listening to the member's comments that somehow Nazi Germany and tattooing are associated with DNA testing would think that is a stretch. I think it is totally irrational.

On this side of the House we will continue to fight for increased health care so people can get the help they so desperately need. I think that is a principle we can all agree with.

I question whether seizing DNA is really an invasion of a person's privacy. DNA samples is like the member said, it is using a series of numbers from the chromosomes to make an identification.

It is very similar to fingerprinting, for instance. The difficulty here is that you cannot see that it is very similar to fingerprinting in that sense because it is more precise. It is the new technology we have available today and Canadians believe it should be used to solve crime. It is probably one of the best tools we have.

Why does this government continue to mislead the public in suggesting that this is an invasion of a person's privacy when it is not? It is a sample of hair or saliva. It is not going to give any information except whether that person matches the DNA found at a crime scene. It does not talk about their mental health, their health in any other way or release any other personal—

[Division No. 230, September 29th, 1998]

Mr. Speaker, I listened with interest to the member's speech. The people of Okanagan—Coquihalla strongly support the taking of fingerprints in criminal cases. They also strongly support a relatively new technology, the taking of DNA samples when it comes to the possibility of solving a crime.

I challenge the member on the issue that these measures are intrusive. There are literally hundreds of unsolved cases of rapes and murders in Canada that police could go now and find the evidence if they were able to use the DNA system to solve these crimes. As the member has pointed out, that would work only if they are a felon or if they have had a criminal record before. That is the only way the Liberal DNA databank system is going to work, if it is a previously convicted felon.

I had to jump up when I heard another Liberal member stating that the Paul Bernardo case could have been solved sooner. Paul Bernardo did not have a criminal conviction. He would not have been in the DNA databank.

I challenge the Liberals on this. They are afraid of a constitutional challenge in the supreme court. The Government of Canada, if it did happen, should on behalf of the people of Okanagan—Coquihalla and other Canadians fight for a simple and very understandable rule, that the rights of law abiding citizens of Canada outweigh the rights of the perpetrators of crime or those accused of crime. Taking a hair sample or a saliva sample or a blood sample is not out of the question. To think it is is totally irrational and not serving Canadians.

[Supply, September 22nd, 1998]

Mr. Speaker, I rise on behalf of the constituents of Okanagan—Coquihalla who are very interested in the member's speech.

I have heard a lot of claims from the Liberals but now they are claiming that Bill C-68 will end the proliferation of guns. That is very interesting because thousands of people are on the lawn today who are law-abiding citizens. They are not smugglers. They are not illegally bringing guns into the country. However, if there is a problem with proliferation of guns coming illegally into the country, that should be dealt with in a legal manner. They should go after the criminals instead of the law-abiding citizens.

What is the Liberal government planning on doing? Is it planning to run ads in gun smugglers weekly magazine suggesting that smugglers run to the local police station to register their illegal firearms? That will not happen. This legislation is a waste of taxpayers' time and money.

The member mentioned penalties. Let's talk about them. For not registering a gun under Bill C-68 the maximum sentence is 10 years for one of those law-abiding citizens out on the lawn—

[Starred Questions, September 21st, 1998]

What are the safety, health, disciplinary and morale reasons behind dress regulations for the Canadian Armed Forces as the exist right now?

[Starred Questions, September 21st, 1998]

Has the federal government done an economic impact study on the implications of the Delgamuuk decision on British Columbia and, if so: ( a ) what are the results of this study; and ( b ) what are the economic impacts of the Delgamuuk decision for the rest of Canada?

[Questions On The Order Paper, September 21st, 1998]

Has the federal government provided the Nicola Indian Band funding for a feasibility study to purchase the Douglas Lake Ranch and, if so: ( a ) how much money did the government provide; and ( b ) what are the terms of the agreement between the government and the Nicola Indian Band?

[Questions On The Order Paper, September 21st, 1998]

How many people were infected with Hepatitis C from tainted blood before January 1, 1986 and what is the source of this information?

[Parliament Of Canada Act, June 11th, 1998]

Mr. Chairman, we are almost there, but not quite. We talked about tax rates in different provinces. However, I am specifically referring to clause 6, the severance allowance which is being offered. I am talking about the equality offered there in comparison to the MP pension plan currently in place.

If my memory serves me correctly, regardless of whether a person works for Eaton's or the Bay, in Nova Scotia, in Calgary or wherever in this country, they participate in the same pension plan. It is an actuarial requirement. It is actuarially required that every employee participate in the same plan. But in the House of Commons there is this inequality that we have designed for ourselves, where we have different members paying different amounts and receiving different benefits. It is a very small plan. There are only 301 members.

I would like to put it to the minister again. To make it an actuarially sound plan, would it not be better to bring in a plan by which all members of parliament would receive a pension plan that is comparable to the private sector? At the same time as being comparable, it would level the playing field for all members of the House of Commons so that we would not have the situation where we have 301 members and probably five or six different categories of pension benefits available to us.

[Parliament Of Canada Act, June 11th, 1998]

Mr. Chairman, I am wondering if the minister could talk a bit more about the severance allowance.

There are 301 members of the House and it appears that the remuneration of many members is different. It is not a level playing field. It is unequal. Having the severance allowance, or a golden handshake, makes the situation even worse because different members of the House of Commons would receive different compensation.

I would ask the minister when he anticipates the government will equalize all remuneration for every member of the House.

[Government Contracts, June 5th, 1998]

Mr. Speaker, it is obvious it is the minister who is confused on this issue. Reformers have been asking for information from the government for seven months now.

Canadians want an open, transparent and competitive bidding process. The Liberal government is maintaining a non-competitive bidding process. The government is risking the loss of Canadian businesses.

Canadian taxpayers might have to put up with this but foreign governments do not. Will the Minister of Public Works and Government Services freeze the Bombardier contract and allow, like Canadians want, open, transparent and competitive bidding?