Charmaine Borg

[Questions Passed as Orders for Returns, May 6th, 2015]

With regard to government funding for internet services, broken down by department and individual project, for each fiscal year since 2005-2006: (a) what amount was spent on the deployment of wired broadband internet services and infrastructure (i) in total, (ii) broken down by region; and (b) what amount was spent on the deployment of wireless broadband internet services and infrastructure (i) in total, (ii) broken down by region?

[Anti-terrorism Act, 2015, April 30th, 2015]

Mr. Speaker, there has been a great deal of opposition to this bill.

We have seen demonstrators in the streets of Montreal, Toronto, Vancouver and across the country. Our online petition has been signed by 200,000 Canadians who oppose this bill because they think it goes too far and violates our rights and freedoms.

The government seems very pleased to be able to pass this bill very quickly, without allowing us to really study it or even hold a real debate. To date there has been only one day of debate at this stage, and that was a Friday. We know that Friday is usually the day when bills are expedited. Therefore, the fact that we are debating a time allocation motion is really problematic for me.

I want to know what this government has to say to the 200,000 Canadians who have signed the online petition and to the thousands of demonstrators who took to the streets to protest against this ill-conceived bill.

[Canada Post, April 24th, 2015]

Mr. Speaker, two years ago a report commissioned by Canada Post forecast losses of $250 million in 2014.

However, this year, Canada Post posted a profit of $300 million. That is a half-billion-dollar mistake. Canada Post used the report to justify ending door-to-door delivery against the advice of 500 municipalities, including Terrebonne.

Will the minister admit her mistake and put a stop to Canada Post's plans?

[The Budget, April 23rd, 2015]

Mr. Speaker, I listened with interest to my Liberal colleague's speech. He concluded by saying that his party had a plan for creating jobs and long-term prosperity. That is nice to hear, but we have yet to see anything . We keep waiting, and still nothing.

The NDP has a solid plan. What is more, the Conservatives thought our plan was so good that they included it in their budget. They are going to lower the small business tax rate from 11% to 9% and create an innovation tax credit. These are concrete NDP proposals.

Nonetheless, where is the Liberals' plan? How long do they think Canadians will wait for a solid plan?

[The Budget, April 23rd, 2015]

Mr. Speaker, I would like to congratulate my colleague on his speech.

He painted a very clear picture of what is in this budget, which will help just a small percentage of Canadians—the wealthiest 15%, who do not need help—even as the middle class is having a harder and harder time making ends meet.

I know that public transit is a very important issue to my colleague, the member for Beaches—East York. I represent a riding that is pretty much a suburb, but we have a growing need for public transit too.

The budget addresses the urgent need for investment in public transit, which the NDP brought forward. However, it involves public-private partnerships. I see problems with that funding formula.

I would like him to comment on that and explain what it means for him and the city he represents.

[World Intellectual Property Day, April 21st, 2015]

Mr. Speaker, April 26 is World Intellectual Property Day. This year's theme is “Get up, stand up. For music.” The music that we listen to today comes from artists around the world, but in the era of globalization and the Internet, we need to ensure that those who make our cultural identity so vibrant, our Quebec and Canadian creators, can make a living from their art.

That is why the NDP believes that we need a better balance between the rights of creators and the rights of users. We have been speaking out for a long time about the government's failure to listen when it comes to this issue. The experts are clear that intellectual property and high-quality patents promote innovation and the creation of good-paying jobs. Today, it is essential to see the protection of intellectual property as a way for Canadian businesses to succeed in the digital era.

Canadians deserve a dynamic digital economy in which they can benefit from opportunities to innovate. On World Intellectual Property Day, let us be proud of our Canadian creators. Their work deserves to be recognized and protected.

[Drug-Free Prisons Act, April 21st, 2015]

Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank my colleague once again.

Yes, we must always work with the provinces, especially on such a broad issue as drug addiction. This problem affects many people. When someone has an addiction, they might do something they would not ordinarily do.

The keyword here is prevention. It would be fantastic if there were no more crime and if there were no more prisons because there were no more offenders. It would be fantastic if there were no addicts in Canada.

However, to make that happen we have to work on prevention. Prevention is vital. We need to consult the provinces and different organizations working in the community in order to come up with a proper prevention action plan. There must be consultation.

Unfortunately, on many occasions, we have seen that this government consulted no one. The Conservatives do their homework in their little corner, and if we do not agree with their decision they just brush us off and do not consult us. They do not consider our point of view and they move forward without consulting. That is unfortunate because there are opportunities to be seized, and we can can work together on prevention.

Prevention is central to a discussion of public safety issues.

[Drug-Free Prisons Act, April 21st, 2015]

Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague for her question.

I believe that as a rule, MPs do not usually respond to hypothetical questions.

Nonetheless, in this case, I am being asked whether I, as minister, would introduce a bill with just five clauses to get rid of drugs in prisons, which is no small feat, and the answer is no. It takes a lot more than that.

We need to invest in programs and provide resources. There needs to be a serious commitment to the programs that the inmates have to have access to. There needs to be mental health care. This calls for a multi-faceted solution.

This bill is a piece of paper that may indeed have an impact, but it addresses just a small part of the problem and provides a small offering of potential solutions. What we really need is a greater commitment if we want drug-free prisons.

[Drug-Free Prisons Act, April 21st, 2015]

Mr. Speaker, I have the pleasure to rise in the House today to talk about Bill C-12.

I will be sharing my time with my colleague from Timmins—James Bay. I will therefore be speaking rather more briefly, but there is no harm done, as I will be leaving the floor to others.

As my colleagues have pointed out, we are going to support this bill. However, we see it as a little piece of paper that does not really solve the problem. It is a little something, but the drug problem in the prisons is a very large one. What is before us today is only a small part of the solution.

This bill provides for ineligibility for parole following a positive test or a refusal to provide a sample. I emphasize that this is already common practice. Drug tests and the refusal to provide a sample are already taken into consideration. That does not change much. It is nevertheless a step in the right direction. At least we are talking about the problem, which is a start. However, we believe the important thing is to create a safer environment for correctional staff, and one in which inmates or ex-inmates can be reintegrated into society and into the community. We have to create an environment in which they can take part in detoxification programs, one with programs and resources for inmates who are unfortunately drug-dependent.

It is also important that we address the problem of street gangs in prisons. It is often street gangs that produce drugs or alcohol inside prisons or arrange for drugs to be smuggled in. Obviously, the result is that the problem spreads and proliferates.

Street gangs and drugs can increase violence in prisons. This concerns me greatly because in Sainte-Anne-des-Plaines, in the riding of Terrebonne—Blainville, there are three federal prisons. Many of my constituents work in one or other of the three. I have spoken to prison workers who are extremely concerned, because their working conditions are unsafe. The environment is not safe because we are not dealing with the problems of violence and street gangs. We are cutting budgets, resources and detoxification programs. We are also increasing the number of prisoners in the cells, with double-bunking, which can increase violence and the spread of gangs within prisons.

Ultimately, it creates a more dangerous work environment for corrections officers. We need to think of those people. They do an extremely difficult job. Not just anyone can do this job in a pressure-filled environment. These people work with prisoners and help protect society. As parliamentarians, we have a duty to do our best to ensure that our prisons are free of drugs and violence. We have a duty to reduce the presence of—if not eliminate—street gangs in prison.

This bill may have started with good intentions, but the government made our prisons less safe by reducing the budget for drug addiction programs by $295 million, which is 10% of the total budget. This will obviously affect the programs, which are often the first targets of cuts to public safety.

However, these programs are essential to helping prisoners rehabilitate. If we want them to become productive members of society, we need to give them a chance to take part in drug treatment programs and free themselves of their addiction. If they have mental health problems, we need to give them the opportunity to participate in proper programs in order to receive care and get their condition under control. Unfortunately these programs fell victim to the Conservatives' budgets.

The government invested $112 million in tools and technology to tackle the problem of drugs in prisons, but failed to achieve the hoped-for results. Now the Conservatives are trying something else. That seems logical to me. This bill might be part of that, but it lacks substance. All it does is reiterate what is already being done, such as screening.

To get to the root of the problem, we need to look at the big picture. If these people have addictions, we need to treat them. If drugs are available in prison, we have to tackle that problem. If drugs are banned in prison, why are they there? If it is because of street gangs, we need to go after street gangs. That seems logical to me, but unfortunately, that is not what is being done.

I talked about the importance of having programs that meet inmates' needs so that they can be reintegrated into the community and become productive members of society. However, the government reduced funding for these programs from $11 million to $9 million even as the prison population grew. That is not enough.

Another thing I wanted to point out, which the Union of Canadian Correctional Officers also pointed out, is that we all want to get rid of drugs in prisons. That is a sincere objective shared by us all. However, we need to be realistic. The union and many other witnesses said that completely ridding prisons of drugs is not a realistic goal. That is important to remember.

The bill's short title is the “drug-free prisons act”. We all want to get rid of drugs in prisons. That is not the issue here. However, we have to wonder if that is realistic. The experts say that it is not. Once again, we need to reframe the debate. Maybe that way we could achieve something.

I want to talk about programs again. I talked about how the budget for drug addiction programs and anti-gang programs was cut from $11 million to $9 million. In seven institutions surveyed in February 2012, only 12.5% of offenders were enrolled in a core correctional program, while 35% were on the waiting lists to access these programs. The waiting lists continue to grow, but institutions do not have the resources needed. It is critical that we address these problems.

In closing, I wish to reiterate our support for the idea of eliminating drugs from prisons, but I want to emphasize the need for resources and programs so that correctional officers can work in a safe environment.

[Rachel Thibeault, April 20th, 2015]

Mr. Speaker, today I would like to express my sadness at the loss of Rachel Thibeault, a resident of Terrebonne, who was well known for her commitment to the community and her volunteerism.

After a long and courageous battle with cancer, Ms. Thibeault passed away on March 28 at the age of 62. As a participant in and ambassador for the Terrebonne Relay for Life, she mobilized her fellow citizens and raised their awareness of the fight against cancer.

In addition to being very involved in her community, Ms. Thibeault had many achievements to her name. She was the administrator for the Griffon d'or gala and the Terrebonne Caisse Desjardins, and she was also the president and co-owner of Administration Thibeault-Lemire.

A mother and businesswoman, she never lost her positive outlook and her contagious cheerfulness. We will remember her perseverance, courage and dedication.

I would like to extend my most sincere condolences to Ms. Thibeault's family and friends. Our community has lost a great lady, and we will miss her very much.