Cathy McLeod

[Strengthening Canadian Citizenship Act, June 9th, 2014]

You complained and complained, and now we do not speak.

[Canada Pension Plan, June 9th, 2014]

Mr. Speaker, I am delighted to stand to speak to the private member's bill from my colleague from Chatham-Kent—Essex. It is always a treat when we get to bring forward private members' bills and introduce them in the House. I congratulate him on having his first one here today.

The bill he has put forward is important and excellent. It sounds like all sides of the House will support the bill, so I congratulate him on that.

I would like to focus on a few of the changes the bill would bring.

For the first part, the bill aligns with the commitments the government made in the 2013 Speech from the Throne, which focuses on victims of crime and to strengthen our justice system.

The bill would also ensure that victims' rights would be placed ahead of those of convicted murderers. The bill is based on the well-established common-law principle that an individual should not benefit from his or her crime.

By legislating the principle that an individual shall not benefit from his or her crimes by becoming eligible for CPP or OAS benefits as a result of committing murder, Parliament would provide clear legal authority to prevent murderers from receiving pensions.

The CPP benefits we are talking about are the monthly survivor pension paid to the spouse or common-law partner or the deceased contributor, the monthly children's benefit for dependent children up to the age of 18 or to the age of 25, if they are full-time students, and a lump sum death benefit usually paid to the contributor's estate.

For a common-law child to be eligible for the Canada pension plan survivor benefit, the deceased contributor must have made sufficient contributions to the Canada pension plan to generate such a benefit. The bill would also apply to the OAS program allowance for the survivor provided to low-income survivors aged 60-64.

Here is again how the bill would work. If the survivor of the deceased individual would normally be eligible to receive them, survivor benefits could initially be paid to an individual charged with murdering a spouse, common-law partner or parent. This eligibility would immediately be revoked when Employment and Social Development Canada was informed that the claimant survivor had been convicted of murdering the person in whose name the benefit would be paid. At this point, the claimant would be determined to have never been eligible for the benefit.

An overpayment would then be established for all CPP or OAS benefits the individual received as the result of the death and steps would be taken immediately to recover the overpayment.

In cases where the person would be convicted of murder but was subsequently found to be not guilty, for example as a result of an appeal, then the person would be entitled to the full benefit once the Department of Employment and Social Development was notified. This would include payments retroactive to the first day of eligibility resulting from the death of a spouse, common-law partner or parent.

With respect to the CPP, in cases where a person under the age of 18 is convicted of murdering a parent, the surviving child benefit can be paid until the child reaches the age of 18. That is because when a child is under 18, the children's benefit is not paid to the child, but to the parent or guardian to help with the costs of caring for the child.

We do not want to create a scenario where the surviving parent of the child convicted of murdering the other parent is forced to repay the children's benefits they receive. This would be punishing a victim who had committed no crime.

The Canada pension plan would be amended to ensure that under no circumstances could individuals known by the minister to have been convicted of murdering their spouse, common-law partner or parent be eligible for the CPP death benefit resulting from that death. This does not affect the estate of the person who has been murdered. The Canada pension plan death benefit could still be paid to the estate of the deceased.

Again, the bill is entirely consistent with, among others, the policy of the United States Social Security Administration, which makes individuals convicted of felonious and intentional homicide in the death of an insured wage earner ineligible for survivor benefits.

The United Kingdom also has legislation to prevent an individual who has unlawfully killed a spouse or partner to receive benefits resulting from the death.

To better enforce these new legislative provisions, the government would engage directly with victims, advocacy and stakeholder groups so they could easily notify the department when someone had been convicted of murder and the death of the victim would normally entitle the convicted person to the benefit. These amendments underscore and emphasize our government's commitment to maintaining a key principle of justice, namely, that a person convicted of a crime should not profit from that crime. It has been made crystal clear that the murderer of a spouse, partner or parent will not benefit from a crime by gaining CPP or old age security benefits.

It is clear that our Conservative government continues to stand up for the rights of victims and that Canadians can count on us to deliver results. I would also like to note, as I said at the start, we have heard from the New Democrats, the Liberals and the member who introduced the private member's bill that this is an important, common-sense piece of legislation that all members of the House can get behind. I truly think that most Canadians, if they knew that someone could murder a spouse or a wife and be eligible for government survivor benefits, they would be absolutely appalled.

What we have is legislation that is inherently sensible. I am appreciative that all members in the House will support it. It is the right thing to do and it sounds like we do have support from all members of the House.

Again, for the member for Chatham-Kent—Essex, congratulations on important legislation, and we look forward to moving it through the process and seeing this into law.

[Public Safety, June 3rd, 2014]

Mr. Speaker, the CoSA sites, which have had agreements for some years now with Correctional Service of Canada, have had their full funding reinstated. That was at the request of the Minister of Public Safety .

In addition, through a five-year agreement under the national crime prevention strategy, Public Safety Canada has been provided with additional funding. The funds include resources for a national evaluation of the CoSA to determine its effectiveness.

Through this new agreement, CoSA sites have been added and more sex offenders have been assisted, in fact increasing the numbers of persons enrolled by 137%. Consideration will be given to the findings of the evaluation that is due in the fall of 2014, which is expected to provide more reliable findings about the impacts of CoSA. Certainly the hon. member can acknowledge that an evaluation of any program that government does is important.

These measures, of course, should not be seen in isolation from the rest of the government's initiatives that are designed to make communities and vulnerable persons safe from crime.

[Public Safety, June 3rd, 2014]

Mr. Speaker, further to the request from the Minister of Public Safety, Correctional Service of Canada has reviewed its decision and restored its full funding to previously existing agreements with the Circles of Support and Accountability, commonly known as CoSA.

When it comes to protecting the safety of our streets, communities and children, the government has adopted more measures than any previous government. Through the 2011 Safe Streets and Communities Act, we have increased the protection of children and youth from sexual predators, ended house arrest, eliminated pardons for serious crimes and have increased offender accountability.

We have talked about other legislation tonight, but we have also recently introduced legislation to strengthen the sex offender registry to prevent sexual exploitation online and to restore balance in the criminal justice system through better protection of the rights of victims.

The government has also acted decisively on measures to prevent crime. We have provided more resources to police officers, crime prevention programs through our national crime prevention strategy and to effectively coordinate in community corrections programs in order to prevent recidivism among offenders released in communities.

The hon. member for Malpeque knows that we are not cancelling effective programs. However, as a responsible government, we are always looking for the right balance to ensure that our citizens are protected from crime and that we, as a government, use our resources efficiently.

That is exactly why we provided additional funding to CoSA in 2009 through the national crime prevention strategy to find out more about the intervention's effectiveness to reduce sexual offences. Through this national demonstration project, we have provided an additional $7.5 million over five years to develop more CoSA sites that provide support to more sex offenders who have been released into communities. This additional support also enables us to commission, for the first time, a comprehensive, independent evaluation of the impacts of the intervention programs on the participants.

In addition to determining whether and to what extent CoSA reduces sexual recidivism, this evaluation will help identify the key elements of successful CoSA practices. Previous data do not provide the same level of detail and confidence that this evaluation will.

Through this additional funding, 250 new participants have entered the program so far, an increase of 137% compared the situation prior to our making this investment. I am pleased to report that 94 have completed the program and 125 are currently enrolled.

CoSA eases the stress and enhances the likelihood of successful community re-entry by providing constant support through the circles to help these offenders develop the positive pro social skills, establish positive social networks and maintain stable housing and employment.

I am convinced that Canadians appreciate that the results of the final evaluation will provide important information to all potential funders regarding the effectiveness of this investment.

It is important to understand that under current sentencing provisions, once offenders have completed their sentences in full, they are no longer under the jurisdiction of Correctional Service of Canada. Investments such as these have the potential to provide needed supports that go beyond the programs offered by the CSC when individuals are in custody.

[Veterans Hiring Act, June 2nd, 2014]

Mr. Speaker, I really appreciate how my colleague talked about this being one piece of the puzzle and that we need a comprehensive plan. He talked about a number of elements of that comprehensive plan. It certainly sounds like we have broad agreement for this particular piece.

Something that really piqued my interest when the member was talking earlier was a recently announced service-dog pilot project we are going to be doing. For our veterans to have benefits from the job opportunities, we need to support that journey back to wellness for those who are suffering with PTSD.

I had the opportunity in my riding to meet someone who had a service dog who was feeling tremendous positive benefits from the support and from the relationship he had with the dog.

I wonder if my colleague could talk a bit more about that program and how that actually might assist the journey of our soldiers back to wellness that we all so want to see.

[Extension of Sitting Hours, May 26th, 2014]

Mr. Speaker, I was here many evenings in the last session and I did hear speeches from the NDP, but they sounded remarkably similar, speech after speech.

I really appreciate our government. We have something to say, we have a few people who debate it very effectively, and then we know it is time to move on rather than repeating and repeating.

As we would have about 80 hours extra, what would that allow us to accomplish for Canadians?

[Fair Elections Act, May 12th, 2014]

Mr. Speaker, my colleague reiterated the parliamentary process. When a bill is proposed, it goes to committee and amendments are made.

It is also important to recognized that always before bills are presented or created, there is an upfront process where Canadians often have input from across the country as to what they see in a broad vision term. Perhaps the member could speak generally on how governments actually consult even before legislation is drafted.

[Fair Elections Act, May 12th, 2014]

Mr. Speaker, I want to go back to the issue of vouching. At committee, I understand that there were concerns regarding people who might have some issues with showing their address. I know there were some amendments made.

I wish the hon. member would talk a bit about vouching and tell us again what the issues are, in terms of people needing to present basic ID, the ID that is available, and a bit about the changes that we made. I think they are important changes and, more important, Canadians believe that most people should be able to produce a piece of identification showing who they are.

[Philanthropy, May 12th, 2014]

Mr. Speaker, today I stand in the House to pay tribute to a very generous and philanthropic Canadian, Mr. Ken Lepin of Kamloops. Earlier this year, Mr. Lepin announced that he would be donating $2.25 million to Thompson Rivers University, on top of the $250,000 he had contributed in the past.

This enormous donation will go toward helping a new generation of students passing through TRU in a variety of fields. Bursary prizes are being created or increased for students in trades, science, nursing, business, law, arts, culinary, tourism, education, and veterinary health. That is just to name a few of the areas that will be supported.

Mr. Lepin is a self-made man who has given back to Kamloops in an extraordinary fashion. In addition to this substantial donation to TRU, he has put thousands of dollars into the Royal Inland Hospital, the B.C. Wildlife Park, and the Salvation Army.

Through his generosity and his life's work, Ken Lepin has left his mark on Kamloops, and it is a better place for it. Thanks to the most recent donation, his mark will be left on generations to come.

We thank Mr. Lepin.

[Homelessness, May 6th, 2014]

Mr. Speaker, I am delighted to stand today in support of Motion No. 455, which is the motion of my colleague from Edmonton East.

His motion is calling for a nationally standardized point-in-time counting of the homeless, but before I get into specifics around the motion, I think it is really important to provide some general context.

First I need to reaffirm that creating jobs and securing economic growth is, and will remain, our government's top priority. We made it through the global recession and continue to lead the G7 in job creation and income growth. Moreover, we are on our way to a balanced budget.

Our government helped create over one million new full-time well-paying jobs in the private sector. We have introduced landmark working income tax benefits to support low-income Canadians who work, and I am very proud to say that we have removed one million low-income Canadians from the tax rolls.

All of these efforts stem from a desire to equip and empower people to lift themselves out of poverty and participate fully in society. We are making a real difference in the lives of Canadians, but of course there is still work to be done to help our homeless population.

Since the launch of the homelessness partnering strategy in April 2007, nearly 25,000 Canadians who are homeless or at risk of becoming homeless have benefited from education and training opportunities. Over 27,000 have received help to find work, and more than 4,800 new shelter beds have been created. In budget 2013, we committed nearly $600 million in new funding over five years to renew the homelessness partnering strategy, and it is making a real difference in communities such as mine in Kamloops.

This time the funding will focus primarily on a housing first approach.

Housing first means providing a permanent place to live and then offering support services to help individuals maintain housing. This strategy recognizes that housing stability is necessary for the success of other interventions, such as education and training, life skills development, management of mental health challenges, and treatment for substance abuse. This means moving away from the short-term quick-fix tactics to long-term sustainable solutions for vulnerable Canadians who are sporadically or chronically homeless.

While this group of homeless people only makes up about 16% of the homeless population, they consume more than half of the resources and services provided through the system. It is really important for us to ask ourselves why, because these people end up becoming dependent on our emergency shelter system and become trapped in a cycle of poverty for years.

The longer a person is homeless, the worse his or her situation will be. Research shows that their overall health and mental health decline, and they are more at risk of becoming victims of crime. It constantly seems to be one step up and two steps back.

This is not the purpose of our emergency shelters and support networks. They are supposed to be a temporary solutions. Our current efforts to address the situation are costing us billions of dollars a year. It is about time we welcome a new way to tackle homelessness.

The good news is that a housing first approach has been proven to be an effective way to reduce homelessness. Thanks to funding from the federal government, the Mental Health Commission of Canada ran a housing first pilot project in five major cities across the country. Over the course of the two-year pilot, an average of 73% of participants in the housing first group remained in stable housing, compared to 32% receiving the usual care. Those are very important numbers that really will guide our direction.

Additionally, for participants who were the highest users of emergency and social services when they entered the study, every $10 invested led to an average savings to government of $21.72. Again, those are very important numbers.

That leads me to why Motion No. 455 is so important. It is really about research. It is really about data and about having the critical information we will need. It will provide us with strong evidence for solutions, as seen through the housing first pilot project.

My hon. colleague from Edmonton East understands that the only way to really measure the state of homelessness in our cities is to establish reliable baseline data. In order to successfully implement housing first initiatives across the country, or any other initiative to address homelessness, we need to know the size and composition of the homeless population. We need the right tools to properly measure the impact of programs, identify best practices, and demonstrate effective results. Motion No. 455 can help achieve this goal.

The motion aims to provide a standardized point-in-time counting of homelessness and is recommended for use by municipalities carrying out the counts. This would include a nationally accepted methodology on how the counts would take place. I know some of the provinces have done very good work in this area, but it is important to look at the differences between, for example, Montreal, Toronto, and Vancouver and have the provinces focus on it all together.

A well-developed methodology would provide communities with a cost-effective way to do a count if they have not established one already. Motion No. 455 would help us know where to provide and allocate resources. We know, of course, that what happens in British Columbia in the winter is very different than what happens in the winter in Ottawa, for example, so again we need to be very cognizant of the different variations across the country.

In conclusion, it is time that we start responding to the needs of the homeless more effectively and efficiently. I ask members to please join me and my colleagues in supporting this motion.