Patrick Gagnon

[Department Of Industry Act, September 26th, 1994]

True, I should get to my question; I will have another opportunity to talk about this issue.

Could the hon. member name the federal government failures in eastern Quebec, when we know that over the last 20 years major investments were made in all kinds of port, airport and tourism infrastructures, as well as in small businesses? Does he refuse to acknowledge that more than 1,000 small businesses took advantage of the liberalities-yes, "liberalities"-of the federal government? Could he name some who might have been resounding failures? There may be some but I doubt it. I would like him to tell us who are these 500 eastern Quebec companies who were not well served by the federal government.

[Department Of Industry Act, September 26th, 1994]

Mr. Speaker, I really wanted to hear the hon. member. Rather than a member serving his constituents, he seems to be representing bureaucrats. Frankly, the number one priority among Quebecers, and in particular those living in remote areas, is job creation. When he dares say-

[Security Intelligence Review Committee, September 23rd, 1994]

Mr. Speaker, the policy of the government is that we do not condone any investigation of legitimate political organizations. We have made that very clear.

We have also heard from the opposition allegations of all kinds that the government is investigating various political parties. There is none of that.

The Government of Canada and the Solicitor General will make public certain parts of the report that will be handed down. I can assure the hon. member that this Liberal government would not tolerate such actions being taken by our secret service.

[Security Intelligence Review Committee, September 23rd, 1994]

Mr. Speaker, I guess members across the way have been waiting for me to stand up for some time.

Responding in Canada's other official language to the question, I am quite aware of what has happened recently. The government is taking into account the report that will be submitted by SIRC to the Solicitor General.

There are also other investigations going on with the Inspector General and we are looking in detail at what happened. I am sure the Solicitor General will respond in due course.

[Criminal Code, September 22nd, 1994]

I am asking him the question, Mr. Speaker. Can he tell us why there is a disproportionate number of aboriginals in our prisons? In many cases these people have been treated like

second class citizens. In many aboriginal communities more than half the population is 18 years or younger and have been given very few chances. Many of them regrettably have turned to crime.

It is not only the aboriginals. They are also pointing to immigrants, new arrivals to Canada, people who were not really given a chance. It is regrettable the hon. member does not look into greater detail on ways to prevent crime. That is the basis of the bill: To reorient our young Canadians or older Canadians for that matter to try to set them straight in order to make them better and more productive citizens.

Obviously I am not going to hear the voice of reason and compassion on that side but they should recognize that those who are incarcerated in Canada today are often those who were not given the privileges of education, who were not given work in some instances and have had to turn to crime in order to pursue their lives. That is what is regrettable.

As a government we are trying to turn this society around. As we very well know the rates of incarceration in Canada are second to those in the United States and they are much lower in Europe. These are things we have to look into. We should start looking into what is happening in Europe, not quoting Russia of 1917 as one of his Reform associates did earlier. We have to look at what is happening elsewhere, what we can do and how we can improve the system.

Of course being a compassionate society we understand what the victims are living through. I am sure it is a living hell for many of them. We cannot turn around and say: "No. The only way we are going to solve this question is by throwing the key away". There is the question of education. There is the question of trying to encourage Canadians to find other ways and means of earning their living.

This is what we have to do as legislators, as members of this proud Parliament. We have to try to find ways to set the course straight for many of these people who regrettably turn to crime.

What percentage are actually illiterate and what percentage come from different classes and different backgrounds? Could the hon. member come up with those percentages?

[Criminal Code, September 22nd, 1994]

Mr. Speaker, I was listening to the rather sensationalist comments made by the hon. member when describing the various cases which have taken place either in his riding or elsewhere across Canada.

What I heard in his exposé is that there is a lack of understanding of what kind of population we are dealing with. We are often dealing with illiterates. We are often dealing with people who never had a chance in life. We are not actually looking for solutions. Actually the only solution the Reform Party is looking for is basically to throw the key away and leave them to rot in prison for the rest of their lives.

One of the best deterrents to fight crime in this society is education. Does the hon. member know the figures of illiteracy found among the incarcerated in Canada?

[Criminal Code, September 22nd, 1994]

Mr. Speaker, I was quite interested in the comments made by the hon. member. We are informed that there are fewer resources now available for incarcerating people in our prison system. We are aware that it costs approximately $50,000 a year to keep a person in prison.

We are faced with overcrowded prisons. We are also talking about the possible increase of 30 per cent over the next few years of incarcerated people in our prisons. However we also know that in the United States where they have reduced actually the levels of liberté conditionnelle, as we say in French, that their levels have not been very satisfactory, that is to say that even if they are not allowing them to leave prison, the crime levels in these states have not decreased.

I am also curious to find out why the Reform Party believes that by not having gun control as we propose that crime levels will actually fall. I find it very curious that we are more concerned about sentencing when we should be concentrating on trying to control the use of firearms in society. If we were able to register firearms in this society we would have better control, but now we are more concerned about sentencing people who have already committed a crime. This is what I found illogical in the arguments presented by the hon. member.

I would like to know how they can reconcile the fact that we do not have to control the use of firearms as proposed by the minister, by this government, but we are better off trying to spend more in terms of sentencing and throwing people into prison when we could simply reduce the murder rate in this country if we had a real serious and comprehensive bill and law controlling the use of firearms. I would like to hear the member's comments on that.

[Referendum On Quebec Sovereignty, September 21st, 1994]

Mr. Speaker, like millions of Quebecers, I understood that there was some confusion following a telephone conversation between Premier Parizeau and the Prime Minister of Canada. However, I clearly heard Mr. Parizeau make an election commitment to hold a referendum within 10 months. That statement is the only one that matters.

[English]

I say ignore the advice of the Leader of the Opposition to put off the referendum until the climate is more favourable. I can assure Mr. Parizeau that these are not the winds of change he hears from the Leader of the Opposition. It is simply hot air.

Mr. Parizeau, hold the referendum in 10 months as you had planned and promised Quebecers during the election campaign. It is time for the Leader of the Opposition to respect the democratic choice of Quebecers and the commitment made by Premier Parizeau, who stated that the referendum must be held quickly, that is, 8 to 10 months after the election.

[Corrections And Conditional Release Act, September 20th, 1994]

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to have this opportunity to discuss the government's plans to solve the pressing problem of public protection as it relates to the correctional process.

The amendments proposed in Bill C-45 will allow for a better control of those who generate the greatest fears, namely violent offenders. The changes proposed by the government will be supported by improved treatment programs for sexual offenders.

These changes are an essential component which the government intends to use to deal with violent crimes and to improve the public's faith in correctional services as well as in the conditional release program.

The Solicitor General pointed out that to pass harsher legislation to alleviate the public's concerns is not enough. Indeed, if we are to solve the social problems within our communities, we cannot merely increase the number of inmates in our jails.

In recent months, the media have given a lot of coverage to the serious and increasing public concern regarding some issues related to the judicial process.

Almost every day there are story headlines, news broadcasts, telling us of the violence which is present in our communities. The television programs we watch also recount quite graphically at times details of violent crime, whether real or fictional. It is difficult to escape the feeling that violence pervades in our lives.

This is why most Canadians believe that crime is on the rise in their communities. It must be remembered that studies on victimization, not the media, best describe the current crime trends.

These studies show that, in 1993, global rates remained stable or decreased compared to 1988 levels. Moreover, they show that the crime rate dropped by 5 per cent in 1993, the biggest decrease since we started keeping statistics on crime, over 30 years ago.

Statistics show a substantial decrease of some 15 per cent in the case of murders, for the second consecutive year. The figure for 1993 is 27 per cent lower than the all-time high of 1975. Nevertheless, Canadians are more and more concerned about crime and are asking the government to find solutions and put a stop to its presumed higher incidence.

It must also be recognized that certain ways of dealing with crime and the fear that it generates can have results opposite to their objective. One only needs to look at the situation in the United States to realize that some strategies against crime can have unpredictable and serious consequences.

Do you know that 13 states have abolished their parole system, essentially in an attempt to slow down the rise in crime? Yet, studies show that crime rates in these states have not decreased and are, in several cases, among the highest in the country. Canada is second to the United States as regards the incarceration rate.

Correctional Services Canada has determined that if the current rate of admissions to penitentiaries continues there will be over 18,000 offenders in federal penitentiaries by the year 2002. This would represent a 30 per cent increase in the next eight years. The cost of housing these offenders is not decreasing. On average it costs the Canadian taxpayer over $50,000 for each incarcerated offender.

While the public is concerned about the consequences of criminal activities, we are increasingly recognizing that, for the most part, crime arises from social problems, like unemployment, poverty and illiteracy.

As members of Parliament, we are responsible for protecting the public and, like all our fellow Canadians, we must look beyond the immediate repercussions of crime and take into consideration the underlying causes of criminal behaviour. That is why our government has implemented a national strategy on security and crime prevention in urban areas.

One of the key elements of this national strategy is the creation by the Minister of Justice and the Solicitor General of a national crime prevention council this past July. The objectives of the council are to unify crime prevention efforts across the country and to give them focus and direction.

Despite the creation of this national crime prevention council, we have to realize that repression and crime prevention are not the exclusive responsibility of the criminal justice system. To come to grips with the many social and economic issues leading to crime requires a multidimensional and integrated approach. We must co-operate and work in partnership with every segment of our society, including parents, teachers, social services organizations and all levels of government.

As the Solicitor General said earlier, in order to undertake an effective and in-depth reform aimed at protecting the public against crime, the federal and provincial governments must work together to find overall solutions.

However, the federal government realizes that control of violent offenders is a complex problem for which it would be pointless to seek a universal remedy.

As you know, governments share responsibility for criminal justice, but mental health is a provincial jurisdiction.

Since searching for ways to deal with high risk offenders is not the exclusive responsibility of any one level of government, a federal-provincial task force on high risk violent offenders has also been set up.

The task force is reviewing all policies and legislation that could help to treat, manage and monitor high-risk violent offenders.

In closing, let me emphasize that the legislative reforms of the Corrections and Conditional Release Act proposed in this bill are clearly measures that will contribute to the protection of the public; balanced measures augmented with comprehensive activities such as crime prevention through social development, through strengthening meaningful partnerships with other levels of government and through community involvement in order to ensure safer homes and safer streets for all Canadians.

[Corrections And Conditional Release Act, June 21st, 1994]

Mr. Speaker, I rise to comment on the legislation introduced this morning by the solicitor general to amend the Corrections and Conditional Release Act.

The bill contains amendments to improve public safety. It deals in part with a subject of concern to all Canadians: high risk sexual offence. While violent crime in all its forms is intolerable, sexual offences against children are of particular concern. They must be dealt with firmly and effectively. The bill provides the tools to deal more effectively with sexual offenders who victimize children.

Measures introduced today would make it easier to keep these offenders in prison until the end of their sentence. Together with better rehabilitation programs the bill will improve the handling and management of sexual offenders. I look forward to seeing these changes implemented as soon as possible.