Audrey McLaughlin

[Petitions, April 14th, 1997]

Mr. Speaker, I have the honour to present over 300 petitions from the province of Alberta which add to about 10,000 petitions received on this subject from across Canada.

The petitioners are looking for amendments to the Criminal Code which would ensure that men take responsibility for their violent behaviour toward women.

This is a major issue across Canada. The petitioners call on Parliament to deal seriously with the issue.

[Petitions, March 21st, 1997]

Mr. Speaker, I have the privilege to present petitions containing hundreds of signatures from residents of Saskatchewan and Alberta who wish to draw to the attention of the House that as deeply concerned citizens, they believe the provocation defence as it is currently used in wife slaughter cases inappropriately and unjustly changes the focus of the criminal trial from the behaviour of the accused and his intention to murder to the behaviour of the victim.

These Canadians call on Parliament to review and change relevant provisions of the Criminal Code to ensure that men take responsibility for their violent behaviour toward women.

[Northern Cross Ltd., March 21st, 1997]

Mr. Speaker, my question is for whomever is responding for the minister of northern affairs or the Minister of Foreign Affairs.

Northern Cross Ltd. is proposing to do resource development in northern Yukon. I would like to ask the government what consultation there has been regarding this application with the Old Crow Resource Council and what work has been done in the United States to clarify that in this area under discussion it does not constitute part of the area of the calving ground for the Porcupine caribou herd.

[Dawson City Nuggets, March 21st, 1997]

Mr. Speaker, in 1905 the Dawson City Nuggets hockey team travelled by dog sled,

by train, by boat and by foot to challenge the Ottawa Silver Seven for the Stanley Cup. The team lost those games and today a shameful banner commemorating that Senators victory flies high in the Corel Centre.

As part of the centennial celebrations marking the discovery of gold in the Klondike the Nuggets are back. They are back to revenge those losses.

A new team of Nuggets has retraced the steps of that first team of trekkers. They have travelled by dog sled, train and boat, and on Sunday the Nuggets take on the Ottawa Senators alumni at 2 p.m. at the Corel Centre.

They have been accompanied on the trip by "Dangerous" Don Reddick, author of The Silver Seven book on the original game; Diamond Tooth Gertie; and Earl ``Wrong Way'' McRae.

This team not only has true grit. It has true heart. The profits of the trip will go to the Heart Institute and Special Olympics.

I congratulate the Ottawa Senators for all of their assistance but say that we will show no mercy on Sunday.

[Canada's Drug Strategy, March 18th, 1997]

Mr. Speaker, federal funding for Canada's drug strategy will end this month. The program provided thousands of Canadians with the education and prevention tools they needed to battle problems with drug and

alcohol abuse. Across the country youth groups, counselling services and programs for aboriginal people are being closed down.

In Yukon the youth empowerment and success drop-in centre will lose its core funding as a result of this decision by the Liberal government. Youth workers in Carmacks, Yukon and other locations from coast to coast are threatened with losing their jobs. The young people who benefit from these programs will have nowhere to turn.

Ending successful programs for young people is yet one more example of this Liberal government's deficit cutting with no vision.

Successful programs which help Canadians be more self-sufficient and productive should be maintained and not ended. I urge the government to reconsider its decision and make the lives of young people a priority.

[Petitions, March 17th, 1997]

Mr. Speaker, I have a petition signed by hundreds of Canadians from the east coast to the west coast. Some are from Quebec and Ontario.

The petitioners are very concerned about the 7 per cent GST on reading materials. They feel the GST is an unjust taxation on reading materials, that education and literacy are critical to the development of our country, and that an aggressive tax on reading handicaps this development.

The petitioners call on the government to zero rate books, magazines and newspaper under the GST.

[Petitions, February 12th, 1997]

Mr. Speaker, I am presenting petitions today from the Yukon from a number of people who are concerned about the recent case of Susan Klassen who was murdered by her husband.

As deeply concerned citizens, the petitioners believe that the provocation defence that is currently used in wife slaughter cases inappropriately and unjustly changes the focus of the criminal trial from the behaviour of the accused and his intention to murder to the behaviour of the victim. Therefore the petitioners are calling

upon Parliament to review and change relevant provisions of the Criminal Code to ensure that men take responsibility for their violent behaviour toward women.

[Petitions, February 5th, 1997]

Mr. Speaker, I have the pleasure to present petitions from over 900 Yukoners who are concerned and want to draw to the attention of the House that these citizens believe that the provocation defence as it is currently used in wife slaughter cases inappropriately and unjustly changes the focus of a criminal trial from the behaviour of the accused and his intention to murder to the behaviour of the victim, who from then on is identified as the one responsible for the accused's violence.

The undersigned request that Parliament review and change the relevant provisions of the Criminal Code to ensure that men take responsibility for their violent behaviour toward women.

[Criminal Code, February 5th, 1997]

Mr. Speaker, a year and a half ago the Yukon community was saddened by the death of Susan Klassen who was strangled and killed by her husband. He was found not guilty of murder and was sentenced for the lesser crime of manslaughter and could be eligible for day parole in a year.

In a matter of days, 900 people in the Yukon signed petitions demanding an appeal of the case. Another 300 gathered for a protest march in minus 40 degree weather. I understand there were 1,200 letters sent from Edmonton where Ms. Klassen's family resides and many other requests for action have been received.

The community outrage at the sentence resulted in an unprecedented mobilization for two demands. The first asks the Minister of Justice to obtain a second legal opinion to ascertain whether there are grounds for an appeal. The second calls for changes to the Criminal Code to amend the statutory defence of provocation.

I ask the minister to seriously review these requests and respond to them publicly.

[Cbc North, February 4th, 1997]

Yes, certainly, Mr. Speaker. I withdraw the comment about the House. However, participating in the debate I think is important because it affects all parts of the country.

I listened very carefully to all members who spoke on this matter. I listened to their arguments. I am a bit puzzled by some of the arguments.

The hon. member for Western Arctic said that CBC North is a lifeline that deserves support. I would agree. In terms of the many services that are provided by the CBC it is a lifeline that deserves support. At the same time, the member for Western Arctic said that there are fiscal constraints. We recognize that. I believe the member for Western Arctic said that we must get our fiscal house in order. Again, I agree.

However, there is another debate which we also need to have, which is: What is the house that we are getting in order? It is the country. How do we preserve, maintain and develop the culture and the unity of that house that we are trying to get in order?

My point, by this motion and by my comments today, is that the debate around the CBC is not just a funding debate, it is about the house that we are attempting to get in order. We may do so well at getting it in order that people may not feel the same allegiance to the house as we lose social programs, health programs and national institutions such as our rail system and the CBC.

That is why I proposed that we have a vote on this motion and that we refer it to committee, although my proposal was defeated.

I understand the argument made by the Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Canadian Heritage and the hon. member for Western Arctic that the CBC is an independent agency in which there should not be government interference. I do not object to that. However, it is impossible to maintain an appropriate service and a stable service without appropriate funding. It is the Government of Canada which provides that funding.

I assume that my two colleagues who spoke before me are not suggesting that providing funding constitutes interference.

I would like to draw their attention to the fact that during the 1993 election there was a very clear promise from the Liberal Party, its members and its leader, that there would be adequate support and maintenance of the CBC.

I draw my colleague's attention to the definition of the word promise from The Concise Oxford Dictionary . It states:

an assurance that one will or will not undertake a certain action

assure, confirm

That is a promise.

This Liberal Party promised to support the CBC. Support, according to the same dictionary, means "keep from falling, sinking or failing; give strength to or encourage".

I do not think all the people who are speaking out in support of CBC can define what the Liberals had meant by supporting the CBC because it is certainly falling, certainly sinking and certainly failing.

That also is at the heart of this argument. There was a clear understanding by the Canadian people that the Liberal Party, were it to become the government, would support our national broadcasting system.

The two members from the government side who spoke said that they liked the CBC and realized that there are constraints, as we all do, but they did not know what they could do as it is an independent agency. What they could do is advocate within their caucus, within their government and within their cabinet that there be sufficient funding for the CBC to continue.

Why is it that so many Canadians are speaking out about what is happening to the CBC? Are my colleagues on the government side suggesting that people like Margaret Atwood, Karen Kain, Atom Egoyan and Norman Jewison who have come together with other celebrities, Pierre Berton for example, to support the CBC are wrong, that they do not know anything and that they do not understand the fiscal house? Are we to assume that the group called Safe Our CBC does not understand what is happening? Are we to understand that Friends of Canadian Broadcasting does not really understand the situation in Canada, that the many constituents I have heard from and I am sure the member for Western Arctic and the Member for Nunatsiaq have heard from do not understand Canada?

I think they understand Canada very well. I think what they and many of us fear is that it will no longer be a vehicle to help Canadians understand each other, to define our country to each other, to define our culture to each other and to maintain it in a way that it will be able to do these things.

It is fine to say that we like the CBC. We love the CBC but we are not going to advocate for enough stable funding for it to run appropriately.

I think what all of these groups are trying to say, what I am trying to say today and what my colleagues from the Bloc Quebecois were saying is that not only do we have to get our fiscal house in order, as we and all of the groups and individuals I mentioned understand that, but we also understand that this country is important. Some of the institutions will of course be adapting to change but some of the institutions like our national broadcasting system is what will help to preserve the house.

I understand the arguments that are being put forward about inference but I think it is a hollow argument, I am sorry to say. It is a hollow argument because no one is asking the members across the way and the government to interfere with the CBC board. What we are asking for is stable funding for Canada's national broadcasting system for the preservation of a very important Canadian institution which contributes to not only national unity but to the development of our culture and understanding of each other as Canadians.