Mr. Speaker, I am not sure if it is a pleasure to rise on this issue, but it is certainly one we should all be involved in. I feel it is important for our party and all members to take interest in this issue. It is a very serious issue that involves fatalities and injuries to human beings and accidents that just should not happen.
I am certainly pleased to rise on Bill C-18 and to speak strongly in support of all its aspects. Bill C-18 amends the criminal code by increasing the maximum penalty for impaired driving causing death to life imprisonment. It also provides for the taking of blood samples for the purpose of testing for the presence of a drug. The amendment gives police the power to take a sample from the person in question even if this person is incapable of giving consent.
I was a car dealer for 18 years and even before that I was involved in the car business. Part of our business was accidents. Part of our business was wrecks. Many of those wrecks were as a result of drunk driving and most of them involved fatalities. I still remember each one of them. I still remember every day that they came in on the back end of a tow truck, smashed to smithereens and reflecting the injuries and even the fatalities of the people who were involved in the accidents. The losses of life were not necessary.
I think of the young people especially that were involved in many accidents. I think of all those lives that were lost. I think of some of the young people whom I knew well that are gone. They should be here, those tremendous young people, but they are gone and never will be.
In my view there should be zero tolerance for this offence. I totally support the increase in penalties proposed in Bill C-18. We were anxious to see the bill come forth earlier, but even with this delay we are pleased that it is now here. We are pleased to return to the debate on this bill.
It was last debated in December 1999. At that time the party pushed for the government to come forth with legislation that introduces the life imprisonment clause for impaired driving causing death. Since then one year has almost passed and parliament has yet to make much headway.
We are pleased to be back here, but we are worried about the delay and wonder about the priorities of the government. We understand now that it is anxious to bring in Bill C-17 respecting cruelty to animals. Meanwhile this bill, which is such an important one in my view and in the view of my party, lies dormant. It is difficult to justify how the bill on cruelty to animals is more important and should take priority over this one, although cruelty to animals is certainly an important issue that should be addressed.
Yesterday the government raised the question of providing $175 million for road work in western Canada to accommodate the grain industry when in fact provinces all across the country have been asking for money for road work, for highway improvements and reconstruction from one end of the country to the other to help save lives.
The best example is Highway 101 in Nova Scotia where over 50 people have been killed in just six or seven years. Most of those people were in their twenties or younger. Again the government has chosen not to do anything for those highway problems, even though they involved fatalities, and instead put its priority on moving grain. It is putting money in highway improvement for grain but it continues to refuse to put money into highway improvement to avoid deaths and injuries. That points to the government's priority in bills. It is difficult to justify or to figure out what thought pattern it uses when it comes up with priorities.
Another one that often concerns me is that there are 3,400 deaths per year on highways in Canada. There is no federal input or direct investigation into these accidents to find out what caused them. Yet we have the Transportation Safety Board of Canada that investigates every train crash, every plane crash, whether there is death or injury. Even at that there were on average for the last five years approximately 100 deaths per year in plane crashes whereas there were 3,400 on highways. There is no focus on those accidents. Perhaps there should be. I feel strongly there should be more attention on the highway aspects of fatalities than on transportation.
Bill C-18 which will increase the penalties for impaired driving should be a top priority. It should go through the House very quickly. It deals with the life imprisonment provision, which was originally part of Bill C-82, an act to amend the criminal code for impaired driving. That became law in the last parliament. Bill C-18 will allow a judge leeway to invoke life sentences. It does not impose the life sentence, but it gives the judge, after reviewing all the circumstances of the case, the leeway to invoke a life sentence for impaired driving causing death, and we totally support it.
We were disappointed when all parties softened their position in the original debate on Bill C-82 and dropped the life imprisonment provisions in exchange for speedy passage. It was a mistake in my view and in the view of our party, and that is why we support Bill C-18. We hope that it goes through.
We supported Bill C-82 but we wanted it improved. We were disappointed to see it watered down. We wanted the current outdated legislation improved upon by including tougher sanctions, fines and suspensions. The bill did not give police enough power to protect society from hard core drinkers who are resistant to change. When we look at the statistics, it is not the younger people now who are the repeat offenders. It is the older drivers who are into a lifestyle and a habit that are finding it difficult to change. Young people are benefiting from the education programs on impaired driving that the government, the provinces and the education system provides. However it is the older repeat offenders who are causing the problems.
High school proms and summer vacation are quickly approaching. Statistics from MADD, Mothers Against Drunk Driving, show that one in every eight deaths and injuries in road crashes is a teenager. In my former occupation in the car business and now in my position as transport critic, it seems to me that the statistics are worse than that. I refer to Highway 101 in Nova Scotia where more than 50% of the people killed on that highway were in their twenties or younger. It does seem to affect younger drivers more than any other. MADD feels that alcohol plays a key role in a great many of these accidents.
In 1997, the most recent year for which statistics are available, 404 youths aged 15 to 19 were killed and another 28,780 were injured in road crashes. The troubling statistic is that 40% of the teenage drivers killed had been drinking. Three-quarters of them had alcohol levels in excess of the legal limit, in excess of 150 milligrams. Dangerous habits developed at an early age become a chronic problem. It is not the younger drivers who are the repeat offenders, it is the older drivers.
Groups like MADD are working hard to deal with this problem at an early age with some success. They are trying to raise the minimum age for drinking. They are trying to raise the minimum age for driving. Many provinces have instituted systems where young drivers get conditional licences and are only approved after a certain period of time when they have proven they can handle the responsibility of a driver's licence. Some provinces have introduced smart card technology to verify the age of an individual trying to buy alcohol.
MADD is not getting enough attention nor enough co-operation from the federal government even though this organization is extremely well-respected and appreciated for the good work it does. Its only purpose is to prevent drunk drivers from killing more people.
MADD is working hard to stop impaired driving among all ages of the population. However, it will not be effective if it does not get the legislation to back up its position and if the police do not get the tools to work with. It appears that the provinces are leading the battle with innovative approaches to drunk driving and impaired driving.
The Nova Scotia government recently passed a tough impaired driving legislation under the Motor Vehicle Act which came into effect on December 1 last year. In Nova Scotia, any driver pulled over with a blood alcohol level between .05 and .08 receives a 24-hour licence suspension. That is not an infraction or an offence. Infractions start at .08, but even before that, Nova Scotia has a new stage where licences are immediately suspended for a 24 hour period. There is no charge laid but it is a good solid warning and gets the attention of drivers. In Halifax last Christmas, the police did 8,000 roadside checks and no one was charged with impaired driving. That was a quite a successful approach for the Halifax police.
Continuing with the get tough approach, the Nova Scotia Conservative government is considering whether it can charge room and board at $100 a day to incarcerate drunk drivers. This idea is only in the initial stages, but putting the extra burden on the impaired driver is seriously being considered. Impaired drivers should be responsible for their actions.
Ontario is another province that is leading the way. It grew tired of waiting for the feds to act so in 1997, with the province's statistics showing more than 300 people killed in drunk driving related accidents, it took action. As a result, in Ontario, if drivers are caught three times for impaired driving, they will get a lifetime licence suspension. It will be lifted after 12 years if the driver installs an ignition interlock. A lifetime suspension takes drivers off the road forever. It has also increased fines to at least $2,000 from $300. This gives judges the leeway to decide what the appropriate penalty will be for the individual and it gives them the tools to work with. The federal government is not giving the judges and the police the tools they need.
It is time the federal government followed the leads of these two provinces. It is time to deal with the issue, to get tough and to took a stand. This is such an important thing because it involves fatalities and injuries, and mostly to young people.
The federal government had an opportunity to send the message that drinking and driving will no longer be tolerated but it has not done it. Every one of these accidents can either take a human life or cause terrible injuries. People who choose to drink and drive and cause an accident or death should be treated the same as if someone took a life in any other fashion. To take a life is to take a life. There should be no excuse and they should be treated the same.
However, the Liberals continue to delay Bill C-18. They show their reluctance to take action on this. They drag their feet. We say that we should not let up on our efforts in the House until the drinking and driving statistics are brought down to zero.
There are positives in Bill C-18 that we endorse and support. Increasing the time limit for the breathalyzer and the ASD testing to three hours, and strictly enforcing the .08 blood alcohol concentration limit are effective amendments that will help police in performing their duties.
Early education is the only way to really begin this process. We support the education aspect. We also support the education of older drivers, those between 35 and 45, who are currently the most frequently charged re-offenders for this charge. It is not the 16 to 21 year old drivers who are causing most of the problem, but the drivers between 35 and 45 remain a startling problem for driving while impaired.
There are also financial consequences that are becoming more substantial all the time. Over a two year period an impaired driving conviction costs at least $5,000 extra in premiums for insurance to any consumer involved. Yet, with all the financial hardship, embarrassment and everything else, it is still not getting through to those drivers 35 to 45 who should know better.
The police have many problems dealing with this issue. It is one of the issues they find most difficult to deal with. It takes a police officer an average of two hours and 48 minutes to process a criminal code charge. They also need the use of mobile breathalysers, physical sobriety testing and passive alcohol sensors to make their jobs more efficient and effective. They do the best they can with the tools they have to work with but presently they just do not have enough to do the job.
Even in light of the one year delay, I would like to thank the Minister of Justice for keeping her promise and reintroducing the life imprisonment provision through Bill C-18. We can only hope that all parties will see the importance of this legislation and give the bill swift passage through the House. Speaking on behalf of the Conservative Party, we certainly will support it.
Bill C-18 amends the criminal code by increasing the maximum penalty for impaired driving causing death to life imprisonment. It also provides for the taking of blood samples for the purpose of testing for the presence of a drug. The amendment gives police the power to take a sample from the person in question, even if that person is incapable of giving consent.
In closing, I want to say that these are all necessary tools which we must put into the hands of the police. The whole goal is to stop fatalities and injuries. The whole goal is to stop impaired driving and make our highways safer.
In the words of MADD president, Carolyn Swinson, in her correspondence to my colleague's office dated March 31, 2000, she summed up the public sentiment with regard to Bill C-18. She states that her:
...personal goal is to push for the legislation to be passed and receive royal assent in the Senate before summer arrives and the roads are filled with vacationing families.
I and my party concurs with MADD's position on this.
