Bill Siksay

[Criminal Code, October 2nd, 2006]

Mr. Speaker, the member addressed some of the issues around definitions and the possible charges that relate to this bill. There has been some discussion this afternoon about the bill's definition of street racing. The bill defines street racing as “operating a motor vehicle in a race with at least one other motor vehicle on a street, road, highway or other public place”.

The member addressed some of the issues he saw coming out of that. I wonder if he might also address the fact that there are different kinds of street racing. I do not have the popular vernacular to describe them all. There is the sort of drag race we are all familiar with and which directly involves two vehicles, but I gather that there is also a trend to timed races, where people race to a certain location and whoever gets there first is declared the winner in this bizarre sport. There are also situations that are just time trials, where whoever gets to the location runs a certain course in a certain period.

Does he see that this definition would cover those aspects of street racing? Or is this something that is missing from the current proposal?

[Criminal Code, October 2nd, 2006]

Mr. Speaker, when the Minister of Justice spoke earlier this afternoon, he outlined the current provisions in the Criminal Code that deal with street racing. These are very serious charges. They deal with things like criminal negligence causing death, dangerous operation of a motor vehicle causing death, criminal negligence causing bodily harm, dangerous operation of a motor vehicle causing bodily harm and dangerous operation of a motor vehicle. All of them carry very serious penalties, 10 to 14 years or life is a possibility as well. There is also the possibility of a driving prohibition from 3 years up to 10 years and even a lifetime driving prohibition.

It seems to me that the Criminal Code already has some serious provisions that deal with street racing which are available to the law enforcement agencies to deal with the question of street racing. I do not know why they have not been enforced. Maybe the member could explain to me why these provisions are not working. They are very serious provisions and it seems to me that if we would enforce what is already there we would be making a dent in the problem of street racing.

[Criminal Code, October 2nd, 2006]

Mr. Speaker, the member's speech this afternoon has been a very helpful intervention on this particular legislation.

It has not been my experience that the courts have been lenient on people who have been found to be engaging in street racing, especially where it causes bodily harm or death. I do not know of any judge who wants to let somebody off the hook for that kind of behaviour. I wonder if he might comment on that and on his suggestion that one of the things that might be of assistance in actually dealing with this problem are stricter sentencing guidelines. I know he mentioned that in tandem with enforcing the existing laws. I am wondering if he might expand on that aspect of his comments a little.

[Canada Student Financial Assistance Act, October 2nd, 2006]

Mr. Speaker, I have a question for the hon. member, but I want to let him know that I appreciate his piece of legislation and I will be supporting it. I think this is part of the puzzle, but I want to ask him why, when the Liberals were in power, in the last Liberal budget the only measure for students was loan forgiveness for dead students? The only measure of support for students was for dead students, but there were huge corporate tax cuts. Why?

[Youth, September 29th, 2006]

Mr.Speaker, the Minister of Human Resources dismissed the summer career placement program as a subsidy to corporations and cronies.

I do not know where the minister was looking, but it was not in Burnaby—Douglas where 86% of projects were in the not for profit sector and most others in small businesses.

These cuts mean fewer good student jobs, cuts to summer day camps for children, cuts to community economic development work and cuts to advocacy programs.

Why did the minister not bother to check how the money is being spent and how important it is to communities like Burnaby?

[Business of Supply, September 28th, 2006]

Mr. Speaker, I know that the member has a keen interest in immigration policies. I want to ask her about the situation of women who, after sponsoring a spouse for permanent residence, find that the spouse had entered into marriage only to gain permanent resident status in Canada.

Often this situation leads to the end of a marriage and family breakdown, which is not surprising, and often domestic violence was a part of the relationship. However, the sponsorship agreement with the federal government means that the Canadian spouse, the woman, remains financially responsible for the ex-spouse for years. Provincial governments are going after those victimized women for social service payments, for instance, to their ex-spouses, often ruining these women financially and victimizing them again. They are victimized once by the offending spouse and once by the government.

Why did the Liberal government not take any initiative to address the hardship caused by the enforcement of sponsorship agreements in situations of family breakdown and domestic violence? Could the hon. member comment?

[Business of Supply, September 28th, 2006]

Mr. Speaker, the member was part of a government that also saw surpluses in recent years. He also says that he was part of a government that took into account gender based analysis when it was making its decision. Why then did that government do so miserably when it came to addressing poverty and the women who live in poverty in Canada?

We know that one in five Canadian women live in poverty, that is 2.8 million women. We know that 56% of lone parent families headed by women are poor; that 49% of single, widowed and divorced women over the age of 65 are poor; that 23.9% of women 65 and older are poor, which is twice the rate of men over 65; that 46% of women in shelters are of aboriginal descent; and that in 2000 the median income for aboriginal women was $12,300, about $5,000 less than their non-aboriginal female counterparts.

Given all of that, given that there were surpluses, given that gender based analysis was apparently being applied, why is the Liberals' record still so bad when it comes to poverty? Why did the Liberals not manage to address that issue?

[Business of Supply, September 28th, 2006]

Mr. Speaker, I want to ask the member about the performance of the Conservative Party in terms of encouraging women to be part of the political process in Canada.

Only 11% of current members of the Conservative caucus are women. In the last federal election only 12% of candidates for the Conservative Party were women. It is a pretty miserable record. It is the worst record of any party in the House.

In the NDP 41% of our members in the House are women, and that is not good enough for us. We have a plan in place that encourages the participation of women in seeking nominations in our party, in a process that has to be acted on before a nomination can be held.

Why is the Conservative record is so miserable on this accord? What is the Conservative Party doing to improve that record? Why, for instance, did the Conservative Party chose only men to be chairs of standing committees of the House of Commons, that no woman has been nominated for that position by the Conservative Party?

[Business of Supply, September 28th, 2006]

Mr. Speaker, I want to ask a question about political representation here in the House of Commons.

We know that in this Parliament the NDP has the largest representation of women among political parties in the House at 41%. In the last election, the statistics are pretty interesting: the NDP had 108 women candidates, which was 35% of the total; the Liberals had 79 for a total of 26%; the Conservatives had 38 women for 12%; and the Bloc had 23 women candidates in Quebec ridings for a total of 30.6%.

In the NDP we have a process that encourages women and minorities to seek nominations in the party. In fact, we cannot go ahead with an NDP nomination meeting until there is a representative of a minority community or a woman standing for the nomination. That is part of the process that our party engages in and this has resulted in our better record of representation of women, not that it is where we want to be. We want to ensure that we are at least 50% in the not too distant future. Tomorrow would be best. Today would be even better, but we are constantly working toward that.

I wonder if she could talk about what the Bloc is doing to encourage the participation of women in the political process in Quebec.

[Business of Supply, September 28th, 2006]

Mr. Speaker, I want to ask the member a question about the pay equity situation in Canada.

It is incredible that even today we still do not have pay equity for women in Canada. Women still cannot expect equal pay for equal work. In the past, they have been subject to endless litigation around this issue and endless mediation. The Liberals introduced a complaints-based process that was found to be totally inadequate. In fact, a two year study of pay equity found the whole system that the Liberals set up did not really address the situation of pay equity.

In the last Parliament, at the Standing Committee on the Status of Women there was all-party agreement with the recommendations of the pay equity committee and that there was a need for new legislation, yet the Liberals did not deliver on that.

Why did the Liberals not deliver on pay equity legislation that had real teeth, real value and supported women? Maybe from her experience with the Conservatives, she can tell us why the Conservatives refuse to move in that same direction and are now only supporting the old, tired Liberal approach to pay equity in Canada.