Dany Morin

[Faster Removal of Foreign Criminals Act, October 3rd, 2012]

Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague for his response.

The well-being of children is very important to me as well. There is a reason why my own bill has to do with youth bullying.

What concerns me about Bill C-43 is that the physical and psychological health of these young people, these children, could be compromised, especially if they arrive as refugees as a result of a dangerous situation in their country of origin. We all know that, for humanitarian reasons, some desperate people arrive here under circumstances that the government would consider unacceptable or even illegal.

What does my NDP colleague think we can do to improve this bill? How can we ensure that these young people and these children will be protected and treated humanely by the Government of Canada?

[Faster Removal of Foreign Criminals Act, October 3rd, 2012]

Mr. Speaker, there is something in this bill that I am very worried about. In the name of the national interest, the minister can use his discretion to deny permanent residence to applicants. The concept of national interest has not been explicitly defined. Furthermore, applicants who are denied permanent residence status do not have the right of appeal.

Can my NDP colleague explain why it is important for these people to have access to an appeal process, especially when the department and the minister have discretionary authority? With too much power concentrated in the hands of the minister, there can easily be abuses. I would not be surprised if that were to happen under this Conservative government.

Can she explain why it is important for people to have access to an appeal process?

[Faster Removal of Foreign Criminals Act, October 3rd, 2012]

Mr. Speaker, my NDP colleague was talking about the myths that the Conservatives are spreading about the NDP and our position on this bill. I would really like to make one thing clear.

The NDP recognizes the need for an effective legal system in order to deport serious criminals who are not Canadian citizens. However, the Conservative government is casting far too wide a net with Bill C-43. At the end of the day, this bill targets the majority of newcomers who obey the law and do not commit crimes. That is why the NDP is opposed to this bill.

I would also like to know whether my colleague realizes that this bill attacks the wrong people because, as I mentioned, newcomers who are good people and who obey the law are the ones who will be affected. They are living in fear.

[Faster Removal of Foreign Criminals Act, October 3rd, 2012]

Mr. Speaker, I have a problem with the changes to the act. Currently, the minister has the obligation, following a request by a foreign national, to look at the humanitarian aspects of the situation of a foreign national deemed inadmissible on grounds of security or violations of human or international rights.

However, once Bill C-43 comes into force, the minister will no longer be responsible for taking into account humanitarian grounds. Yet in many cases, when individuals make a refugee claim or apply for permanent residence, humanitarian grounds are critical.

Could the Liberal member could tell us what he thinks of the fact that the minister will no longer be responsible for considering humanitarian grounds?

[Faster Removal of Foreign Criminals Act, October 3rd, 2012]

Mr. Speaker, Bill C-43, An Act to amend the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act, concentrates more powers in the hands of the minister by giving him the authority to rule on the admissibility of temporary resident applicants. Furthermore, the minister can declare a foreign national to be inadmissible for various reasons. That worries me a bit. This concentration of power in the hands of the minister is a systematic pattern in the Conservatives' bills.

Is my Liberal colleague as concerned as the NDP that this bill and others concentrate more powers in the hands of the minister?

[Business of Supply, October 1st, 2012]

Mr. Speaker, my Conservative colleague mentioned a little earlier in his speech that employment insurance should serve as a bridge for someone who has just lost his or her job.

I do not disagree with that, but it raises the following question: why will the Conservatives not adopt the NDP proposal to eliminate the two-week waiting period? That delay prevents people who have lost their jobs from meeting their families' needs, because it takes several weeks for the first EI cheque to arrive.

I think this is an excellent measure that the Conservatives should adopt.

[Business of Supply, September 20th, 2012]

Mr. Speaker, my Conservative colleague opposite wanted to talk about the Canada-EU comprehensive economic and trade agreement, and I am happy to do so.

I will talk a bit about my region, Saguenay—Lac-Saint-Jean. This region is 88% forestland. You can imagine that the forestry industry is very important in this area. My region is even the primary wood-producing region in Quebec. Communities in my riding, such as Ferland-et-Boileau and Saint-Fulgence, depend on this industry.

I know that the federal government has abandoned the forestry industry over the past few years.

I have a question for my Conservative colleague. As part of the comprehensive economic and trade agreement with Europe, does the government plan on requiring secondary and tertiary processing, as well as local investments for the communities that depend on the forestry industry? That would be a great help to the people in my community, the families and workers who depend on the forestry industry.

[Enhancing Royal Canadian Mounted Police Accountability Act, September 19th, 2012]

Mr. Speaker, my NDP colleague just mentioned that he does not think the bill goes far enough. This comment made me think about what Commissioner Paulson said. He said that the bill does not go far enough and will not help restore public trust in the RCMP.

I would like to ask my NDP colleague whether he thinks this bill will be enough to make people trust the RCMP and how it operates? If not, what could an NDP government have proposed and brought forward in such a bill?

[Enhancing Royal Canadian Mounted Police Accountability Act, September 19th, 2012]

Mr. Speaker, I am somewhat troubled by Bill C-42. I would like to ask my NDP colleague what she thinks. I find that what the Conservatives are proposing—the creation of an organization that has very close ties and reports to the minister—is a little troubling.

Does my colleague not think that it would be better to have an independent oversight body that would report directly to Parliament and that could subsequently make binding recommendations concerning the RCMP and even conduct a complete, civilian investigation into the RCMP?

[Enhancing Royal Canadian Mounted Police Accountability Act, September 19th, 2012]

Mr. Speaker, for months now, the NDP has pressured the minister to give serious consideration to the sexual harassment issues in the RCMP. The fact that 200 women have launched a class action suit against the RCMP shows that there is a problem in Canada in 2012.

But I would like to ask the hon. member whether she shares my view that Bill C-42 will not address the systemic problem of culture within the RCMP. I actually think that the bill will not be able to change the culture and that the 200 women—like the other women who have worked or will work for this institution—will be subjected to this culture within the RCMP and are not very likely to see their conditions improve.

Does the hon. NDP member think that Bill C-42 will change the culture within the RCMP?