Dave Van Kesteren

[Economic Action Plan 2014 Act, No. 2, December 2nd, 2014]

He is new.

[Petitions, December 2nd, 2014]

Mr. Speaker, I have a number of petitions here from my riding.

The petitioners call upon members of Parliament to condemn discrimination against girls occurring through sex-selective pregnancy terminations.

[Canada Pension Plan and the Old Age Security Act, November 27th, 2014]

Mr. Speaker, I want to thank both hon. members for their kinds words and for their succinct understanding of how we have all worked collectively. I applaud them for mentioning that.

As the member for Markham—Unionville noted so well, we can all take credit and we can all take some of the blame. However, today we are all here together and we are going to correct this problem.

As was noted, it is a rare occurrence in this House. Oftentimes, we seem to battle each other. However, every one of us recognizes that this is something that must end. I am very pleased to have been able to present this bill, and I am also very pleased to have been able to work with this House in such a cordial manner to come to an agreement.

I hope that this bill will now move quickly through the Senate and quickly become law, so that we can rectify something that was so wrong and turn it into something that is so right.

[Canada Pension Plan and the Old Age Security Act, November 27th, 2014]

Mr. Speaker, yes, it would. It is a terrible, tragic situation she cited. I do not know the particulars, but all those who have been receiving benefits would be obligated by law to repay those benefits. As I said in my opening remarks, there will be some, but fortunately not many, in this situation. However, the law would be retroactive.

[Canada Pension Plan and the Old Age Security Act, November 27th, 2014]

Mr. Speaker, the answer to the question is, yes, he would have to repay that money right back to the start.

There have been cases of hardship, as I know the hon. member is aware, which the government would of course recognize and work with. However, any accumulated money that is available would be paid back to the government.

[Canada Pension Plan and the Old Age Security Act, November 27th, 2014]

Mr. Speaker, in her first question, the member asked when this retroactive part of the bill would take place. It would take place when the bill becomes law and would apply to those who have been receiving benefits, so anyone in prison today who has been receiving benefits, for whatever period of time it has been, would have to pay the government back.

The other question was with respect to the difference in the percentages of males versus females. If I understand her question correctly, she is absolutely correct that in most cases there would be a larger percentage of males than females.

[Canada Pension Plan and the Old Age Security Act, November 27th, 2014]

moved that the bill be read the third time and passed.

Mr. Speaker, I welcome the opportunity to be here this evening to talk about my private member's bill, Bill C-591, which proposes changes to the Canada pension plan and the Old Age Security Act.

When I first introduced the bill, it set out to deny Canada pension plan and old age security survivor benefits to anyone convicted of murdering their spouse, common-law partner, or parent. This would apply to the allowance of the survivor benefit, the CPP death benefit, the CPP orphan benefit, and the CPP survivor benefit.

Initially, the bill only proposed to deny benefits to those who were convicted of first and second degree murder. However, after listening to concerns expressed in the House and after consultations with the Canadian public, I decided to expand the bill to include those convicted of manslaughter.

First, let me explain why manslaughter was not included at the start. Unlike murder, manslaughter is an offence where the death is not intended, although there may be intent to cause harm. The crimes can range from near accidental deaths to near murder. As members can imagine, this leaves a large gray area.

Initially I was concerned that due to the wide spectrum of cases that manslaughter can present, denying survivor benefits might not be right in certain situations. Because of this, I initially left those convicted of manslaughter outside of the bill.

I was also very pleased that the government moved amendments, seconded by the NDP, to ensure that manslaughter be included. The bill now proposes that in a manslaughter case where the sentence is suspended, that is, the convicted person does not serve time in prison, they would still be eligible to receive survivor benefits. A suspended sentence tends to be given when there are exceptional circumstances surrounding the act of manslaughter and when the person is not considered a danger to society.

It is extremely rare for someone to be convicted of manslaughter and be given a suspended sentence, but it does happen. Let me give an example. Consider a woman who has suffered a history of violent abuse at the hands of her husband. If she is convicted of manslaughter but receives a suspended sentence, she would still be eligible for survivor benefits. However, I repeat that in the vast majority of cases, a person convicted of manslaughter would be denied benefits.

We all agree that murder and manslaughter are reprehensible acts. That is why I felt compelled to bring forth this serious issue to Parliament. This bill is not just important to me, but to all of those who believe that a victim's rights should come before a criminal's. It will bring the act in line with a long-standing judicial principle. That principle states that no one convicted of a crime should benefit from that crime. That is what my private member's bill aims to do.

I also want to point out that, once this bill is passed, its provisions will be applied retroactively. That means that anyone convicted of murder or manslaughter who has been receiving Canada pension plan or old age security survivor benefits will have to repay the government. Fortunately, the changes to legislation we are talking about today will affect very few people. About 30 people each year in Canada would be denied survivor benefits due to these circumstances.

I have been assured that the government will make every effort to ensure that these people are denied any survivor benefits. That is why the Department of Employment and Social Development reached out to victims advocacy groups and other stakeholders. Stakeholders have been asked to notify the Department of Employment and Social Development when a convicted murderer or person convicted of manslaughter applies for Canada pension plan or old age security benefits.

I was pleased that this bill has received unanimous support in the House and at committee by all parties, and I would also like to acknowledge my colleague from Hamilton Mountain for her advocacy on this issue. I encourage all members of this House to continue to support this piece of legislation and to pass it quickly so that it may become law as soon as possible.

This bill is about doing what is right for Canadians, and that is what all of our constituents sent us here to do.

[Business of Supply, October 9th, 2014]

Mr. Speaker, I would like to pose a question for the member while it is early in the discussion.

I listened to the member's speech, which was very clear, but one area that I still do not quite understand is the NDP's biggest concern. Is it the pipeline, or is it the oil tanker traffic, or is it both?

I wonder if the member could clarify that so that as we begin this discussion, we know what footing New Democrats are on.

[Wes Thompson, October 2nd, 2014]

Mr. Speaker, on September 22, 2014, we were saddened by the passing of Wes Thompson in his 88th year.

Wes became president of W.G. Thompson & Sons at the age of 24, where he served until his retirement in 1993. Under his leadership, the company expanded to 17 locations in Canada and the United States.

He was past president of the Ridgetown Campus Agricultural Committee, past member of the Royal Agricultural Fair board, past president of the Ontario Grain & Feed Dealers Association, and past president of the grain sector of the Ontario Grain & Feed Dealers Association, to name a few of his accomplishments.

Wes was a founding trustee and a past director of the Chatham-Kent Health Alliance and Public General Hospital Foundation.

In 1999, Wes was named agriculturalist of the year and inducted into the Kent County Agricultural Hall of Fame as well as being named citizen of the year in 2002 by the Blenheim & District Chamber of Commerce.

To his wife Patricia and to his family we offer our sincere condolences as well as our deepest appreciation for his life and his many contributions to our community.

[Canada Pension Plan, September 19th, 2014]

Mr. Speaker, it has been quite obvious that, as my first private member's bill, it is something that most members agree on as I did not see too much disagreement.

I want to especially thank the members for Kamloops—Thompson—Cariboo, Hamilton Mountain, Charlottetown, Richmond Hill, and just now, the member for Argenteuil—Papineau—Mirabel for their remarks. Certainly everyone seems to be in agreement that this is an injustice in today's society must be remedied.

The purpose of the second reading of the bill is to decide whether the it should go on to committee. I think the greatest area of dissension may be some disagreement as to whether manslaughter should be added to the bill. That is why we do these things. That is why this is a House of debate and why we consider bills. It is to introduce and suggest some possible improvement.

In my opening remarks and in my answers, I mentioned why it was my intent to not include manslaughter, but it is something we will talk about in committee and consider.

I again want to thank all those who participated in and have helped with the bill. I hope the result of all of this effort in the House will make Canada a better and more just place in which to live.

It is an honour to be part of the kind of system, government and country in which we live.