House of Commons photoWon his last election, in 2021, with 47% of the vote.
Canada-U.S. Border May 27th, 2009
Mr. Speaker, I am sure the member opposite just cannot understand that we have a great relationship with our partners to the south. It has grown since this party took power. It does not matter which party is in power in the United States. Today's meeting between our minister and the homeland security secretary was a great meeting to build those bridges across our country and their country. I do not know what he could find wrong with it.
Missing Children May 25th, 2009
Mr. Speaker, today I rise in the House on National Missing Children's Day in order to highlight the importance and success of our missing children program, a program that aims at preventing child abductions as well as returning missing children back to their families and loved ones.
There is no greater fear for a parent than to have a child go missing. Our government is working with its partners to keep our nation's children safe and protect them from harm. Our missing children program works tirelessly, both domestically and internationally, to find and return children to their families.
Since 1988, more than 8,000 children have been located or recovered because of the perseverance and diligent efforts of our missing children program.
Today we recognize the Zebra Child Protection Centre as this year's recipient of the Air Canada Kids' Horizons/RCMP Child Recovery Award. We also recognize the Peel police vice squad as this year's recipient of Our Missing Children Award of Excellence.
I encourage all Canadians to join me in thanking those people from all across Canada who have made it their life's work.
Mr. Speaker, through the safer communities strategy, our government is implementing a basket of measures that are both tough and effective on crime. They foster enhanced enforcement, sentencing corrections and prevention efforts.
The refocused approach of crime prevention invests in supporting initiatives that are now more focused on those most at risk of offending, including youth at risk of joining gangs. Our goal is to discourage young people from joining gangs and to help those already involved in gangs to get out and get on the right path.
Let me just finish by suggesting the hon. member make herself far more informed of the allegations she makes. On this side of the House, there happens to be four members who were police officers, who would be happy to speak to the member at any time to explain some of these things. With all due respect, I do not want to get into any disagreement with the member, but it is important she knows what the important issues are to the House and to Canadians.
Mr. Speaker, I rise to respond to the question put to the House by the hon. member for Vancouver Quadra regarding the issue of escalating gang violence in British Columbia, at least that is what it was supposed to be, but she certainly rambled around a whole bunch of issues. I will focus my answer on gang violence in British Columbia.
The government is committed to giving the streets of our cities back to law-abiding citizens. We believe community safety is a defining value, indeed, a fundamental right in Canadian society. The government is taking concrete action on all fronts and is implementing a balanced approach to reducing crime.
We are providing the law enforcement community with the tools it needs to combat crime, and we have recently introduced new crime bills to this effect. We are ensuring there is more police presence in our streets, through increased investments in the RCMP in support of hiring of over 1,000 new RCMP police and civilian staff and through our $400 million police officer fund that supports provinces and municipalities to recruit 2,500 additional officers. We are also supporting effective crime prevention measures that will help communities and families keep youth away from lives of drugs and crime.
We are taking a two-pronged approach, holding accountable before the law those who commit crimes, while helping those who may be at risk before they turn to a life of crime.
In this respect, we have renewed the national crime prevention strategy in 2008, effectively doubling the permanent funding for the strategy. This will lead to more stability and predictability in crime prevention efforts across Canada.
The hon. member of Parliament would be interested to know that the National Crime Prevention Centre is currently funding more than 20 community-based projects in the province of British Columbia, which are designed to steer vulnerable children and youth away from crime. Two of these projects, worth $2.1 million, are funded through the youth gang prevention program to specifically address the issue of gangs by preventing youths from joining gangs in the first place. These multi-year investments will deliver concrete results to British Columbia communities.
Effective crime prevention measures cannot be implemented without the active support of local communities, the voluntary sector, parents, and schools. We are therefore working very closely with them to ensure they have access to the most up-to-date information on what works to prevent crime, especially among children and youth who are most vulnerable to negative influence because of their personal lives and circumstances. Furthermore, we are working very closely with provincial governments to ensure the prevention measures that are developed also respond to their priorities.
The effective responses to crime and insecurity require a coordinated approach that brings together all partners and orders of government in a focused effort to combat violence. That is the approach this government is taking.
Allow me to underscore the point that our efforts to refocus the national crime prevention strategy were designed to maximize its benefits and effects. This is why the strategy now provides support to communities to implement interventions that are based on the best available evidence and target those most in need.
The youth gang prevention fund helps fund community groups that work with troubled youth to prevent them from becoming involved in gang violence by targeting specific risk factors associated with youth gang activity and youth at the highest risk of gang involvement.
Border Service Agency May 14th, 2009
Mr. Speaker, CBSA takes its obligations under the Official Languages Act very seriously. It is committed to ensuring the services are offered in both official languages. Under the rules of the Immigration and Refugee Board, all documents presented as evidence are required to be translated in the official language of the proceedings.
Madam Speaker, ensuring appropriate access to professional mental health services is a priority for both the Government of Canada and the Correctional Service of Canada. The Government of Canada has taken action on this issue, and the service is fully committed to implementing appropriate and effective measures to help prevent deaths in custody.
To this end, the service has implemented a number of measures in response to the recommendations set forth by the correctional investigator. It is working to address the many issues and challenges that women offenders face and has taken steps to increase its services and support to high-needs women offenders. The Correctional Service is committed to improving upon existing practices and procedures as they relate to mental health services that contribute to the improvement and maintenance of offenders' mental health and adjustment to incarceration and assist them in becoming a law-abiding citizens.
As I previously mentioned, an action plan has been developed to respond to Mr. Sapers' recommendation following his investigation into the incident. The Correctional Service has already implemented and is in the process of implementing a number of measures in this regard.
Madam Speaker, I rise to respond to the question raised in the House on March 4, 2009, by the hon. member for Moncton—Riverview—Dieppe regarding the recommendations made by the Office of the Correctional Investigator following the tragic death of Ashley Smith.
I would like to highlight that this government has been working with both officials from the Correctional Service of Canada and the Office of the Correctional Investigator to address the areas of concern identified by Mr. Sapers to ensure that his recommendations are appropriately addressed.
As one may recall, in the 2008 federal budget, the Government of Canada announced that the service will receive $16.6 million annually in permanent funding, commencing in 2009-10, to enhance institutional mental health services, in particular to screen offenders for mental disorders at admission. This will improve the continuum of care provided and the correctional results for federal offenders, including women, with mental disorders.
The Correctional Service of Canada has already taken action to prevent deaths in custody and to address many of the recommendations raised in the correctional investigator's report. Although the service has assessed offenders at intake for some time, in 2008, it implemented an enhanced screening process for mental health problems and suicide risks upon an offender's admission into federal custody. Referrals are then made, where necessary, to mental health professionals to ensure appropriate interventions occur.
The Correctional Service of Canada is developing alternatives to the use of long-term segregation for offenders with mental health issues who are not certifiable under provincial mental health legislation and who do not consent to treatment. This includes a review of the capacity to address the needs of women offenders with mental health and behavioural needs. Short- and long-term strategies have been developed on service, support and accommodation needs for women offenders identified in this group.
The policy related to segregation has been amended to explicitly include a role for the chief of health care and psychology. The Correctional Service of Canada approved the implementation of a one-year pilot project, a mobile interdisciplinary treatment assessment and consultation team, to support women's institutions in the management of women offenders with substantive mental health and behavioural difficulties. This team is mandated to provide advice and expertise to operational sites and regions on the integrated management of high-risk, high-needs women.
Health care staff will ensure that health information is shared with the case management team when it is relevant to correctional decision-making, particularly in cases related to institutional placements, transfers, administrative segregation and disciplinary measures. This service revised its grievance policy in 2008 to ensure that complaints and grievances submitted by segregated offenders are identified daily, monitored regularly, classified properly and provided with the priority they merit. All high-priority grievances for segregated inmates will be forwarded to the warden without delay.
The service invited provincial and territorial coroners and chief medical examiners to a meeting in March 2009 to discuss how to better address the issue of deaths in custody and to review its plans for action for moving forward. The Correctional Service of Canada is also taking significant steps to increase its services and support for high-needs women offenders. As part of training efforts to better deal with high-needs women offenders, it has developed mental health training for front-line staff and managers who work in women's institutions.
Previously, in 2004, the Correctional Service of Canada developed a mental health strategy in Canada's prisons to improve its capacity to deliver mental health care to offenders in institutions.
Canadian Forces Superannuation Act May 12th, 2009
Mr. Speaker, I welcome the opportunity to speak to Bill C-201.
This is a matter of importance to all Canadians as the amendments proposed in the bill would have significant long-term financial implications for the government and for taxpayers. I encourage hon. members to fully apprise themselves of the facts and recognize the real impact of the changes before agreeing to support Bill C-201.
Let me begin by saying how pleased I was to hear member after member rise in the House back on March 25 to express their support for RCMP and Canadian Forces personnel. Despite all the wonderful sentiments expressed, and I do not doubt their sincerity, we need to focus on the reality of the situation. We cannot allow good intentions to cloud our judgment only to face the consequences later.
I too have great respect for the people who serve this country in uniform. I must admit to a slight bias in this regard having served for 30 years as a police officer before being elected to Parliament. I have worked hard with my colleague, the Minister of Public Safety, and with others on the government side to make sure the RCMP and other police services have the tools and resources they need to do their work.
I feel confident that no government in the recent history of this country has done more to support police and military personnel than ours, and we are determined to continue to support them after the uniform comes off, to borrow a phrase from the hon. member for Sackville—Eastern Shore. However, that support needs to be tempered by common sense.
As much as I value and understand the true role police officers play in society, and as much as I appreciate the sacrifices made by members of the Canadian Forces, I cannot support this proposed legislation in its current form.
Rather than trying to address the specific situations of a limited number of individuals who are receiving a disability pension, the hon. member for Sackville—Eastern Shore has put forth blanket amendments that would apply to all current and future pensioners of the RCMP and Canadian Forces.
The costs of such a proposal and the precedents it would set for other police and law enforcement personnel across Canada should cause hon. members on the other side to take a step back and carefully and responsibly reconsider their support for Bill C-201.
It is important to understand that nothing is being done improperly right now. No injustice has been perpetrated against the RCMP or any military pensioners. The pension programs for both groups are working as designed.
In his remarks during the first hour of debate on Bill C-201, the hon. member for Sackville—Eastern Shore repeatedly used the word “clawback” to describe the situation as he sees it. Not only does that term have negative connotations, but it is simply wrong to describe the elimination of the bridge pension as a clawback.
The hon. member also used the term “deficiency” to describe the reduction in their employer sponsored pension once retired members of the RCMP and Canadian Forces start receiving the Canada pension plan. Again, this is simply not an accurate representation of the facts. The reduction is not a deficiency. It is planned for and expressly taken into account in determining contribution rates when members are still working.
Members of the RCMP and Canadian Forces, like all other federal public servants, do not pay full contributions to their employer sponsored plan on that portion of their salary that is subject to Canada pension plan.
The goal of this integrated approach is to ensure that members are not burdened with excessively high contribution rates during their working lives when their day-to-day expenses for their family, such as children's sports, educational costs, mortgages and loans, are often at their highest, yet they are still afforded an opportunity to enjoy an acceptable level of income during the course of their retirement. This is a careful balancing act that minimizes the member's input during his or her working life while still maximizing the level of income during retirement.
It is no coincidence that this is the way the plan was designed. Incidentally, this is the way that most public service pension plans are administered in Canada today.
I can assure the House that retired RCMP and Canadian Forces personnel are receiving pension benefits that fully reflect the contributions they have made to both their employer sponsored plans and the Canada pension plan. When they start receiving the Canada pension plan and the bridge pension is eliminated, most pensioners continue to receive the same amount of money, just from two sources rather than one.
The proposal in Bill C-201 to eliminate the reduction in pensions would fundamentally change the design of the plan which has been in effect for some 40 years. It would also place an unreasonable burden on current members of the RCMP and Canadian Forces, who would see a significant jump in their pension contributions in order to fund this change.
We have already heard that the costs of the proposed change would be enormous. My colleague, the hon. member for Wild Rose, advised the House on March 25 that these proposed amendments would increase the past service liability for the RCMP pension plan by more than $1 billion and would result in ongoing costs of tens of millions of dollars each year. The much larger Canadian Forces pension plan would incur a one-time past service liability of several billion dollars if these changes were implemented and ongoing costs could be in the neighbourhood of $1 million per year.
How would these billions of dollars in additional costs be paid? They would be paid by taxpayers, of course, and also by working members of the RCMP and Canadian Forces, who would see their annual pension contributions increase by as much as 30%. I see no fairness in that situation, a sentiment that I am sure would be voiced loudly by the rank and file members who would be required to shoulder much of this massive financial burden.
The RCMP pension plan is already generous by Canadian standards and the level of taxpayer support is substantial. Members currently pay less than 30% of the plan's actual costs. For every dollar contributed by plan members in 2008, the Government of Canada contributed $2.29. When compared with pension plans for other police services, the RCMP pension plan ranks highest from the perspective of the employer's contributions.
We also heard during the first hour of debate that the changes proposed in Bill C-201 are opposed by the Federal Superannuates National Association, which represents pensioners from the RCMP, Canadian Forces and regular federal public service pension plans. The association agrees with the government that the current approach is correct and that retired members of the RCMP and Canadian Forces are receiving the full benefits to which they are entitled.
In her remarks during the earlier debate on this bill, the hon. member for York West conceded that this bill “is short on specifics and costing”. I am pleased that some hon. members on the other side recognize that costs would be far greater than expected. Bill C-201 is not a reasonable or balanced approach. It would cost taxpayers billions of dollars and would create a special class of retired public servants.
I urge hon. members on both sides of the House to take the responsible course of action and vote against sending this bill to committee.
Royal Canadian Mounted Police Superannuation Act May 12th, 2009
Mr. Speaker, the speech of my hon. colleague was full of a great number of inaccuracies, and I will not try to correct all of them.
When my hon. colleague talks about recruits, I ask whether she really understands what is going on in the country, and perhaps even in her own province. Can she tell us what she has done to change things in her own province? We understand that the City of Montreal and Sûreté du Québec do not offer compensation to recruits because of the way the legislation is formulated in Quebec for police candidates. In the province of Quebec, candidates must have graduated from the Quebec police college prior to being hired by any police force in the province.
If she were to look at that legislation, she would find it very similar to the situation the RCMP cadets are in. They are not members of the force until they complete their training. In actual fact what we are talking about is exactly the same as it is in the province of Quebec.
Royal Canadian Mounted Police Superannuation Act May 12th, 2009
Mr. Speaker, I am sure the hon. member, if he were to read through Bill C-18, would see that it does just that. It does bring fairness to a number of areas within the RCMP.
I recognize his comments and I am well aware of those comments. I have lived that, as members of my family are living it today, but this is about Bill C-18, a bill that would bring fairness to members of the RCMP and perhaps members of the RCMP who wish to transfer to other forces at the same time. It does give that portability. I think that if members in the House were to read Bill C-18, they would see that it is about creating a fairer, more level playing field for all police in Canada.