Françoise Boivin

[Military Contribution Against ISIL, March 26th, 2015]

Mr. Speaker, I resent the expression from the minister that the NDP stands for nothing on the situation.

I read the amendments that were proposed by our foreign affairs critic carefully. Here are just a few:

...boost humanitarian aid in areas where there would be immediate, life-saving impact, including assisting refugees with basic shelter and food needs;

....work with our allies in the region to stabilize neighbouring countries, strengthen political institutions and assist these countries in coping with an influx of refugees;

...contribute to the fight against ISIL, including military support for the transportation of weapons;

...provide assistance to investigation and prosecution of war crimes;

...increase assistance for the care and resettlement of refugees impacted by this conflict;

...work to prevent the flow of foreign fighters, finances, and resources to ISIL, in accordance with our international obligations under United Nations Security Council Resolutions 2170, 2178, and 2199;

...put forward a robust plan of support for communities and institutions working on de-radicalization and counter-radicalization;

Are all these nothing in the eyes of the minister?

[Military Contribution Against ISIL, March 26th, 2015]

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to be able to ask the Minister of Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness questions about government Motion No. 17.

I am very proud of my party's position. In our careers as politicians, we may never be asked to make a decision more important than the one we are making today. I take this role very seriously. I always take exception when opposing positions are attacked as being ridiculous or are belittled. That certainly does nothing to elevate the debate.

That being said, the minister made a point of talking about something he might be more familiar with in his role as the Minister of Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness, and that is deradicalization, if I can put it that way. I am curious to know whether in Motion No. 17, the minister sees any commitment by his government to counter this radicalization on Canadian soil. I do not see any such commitment in any part of the motion. No reference is made to it whatsoever.

[Public Safety, March 12th, 2015]

Mr. Speaker, that is funny. The government did not need our support to prove its failure.

Those are fine words, but when it comes right down to it, the minister has not solved anything. This has been an ongoing problem since 2009. It currently takes two years before criminal records are updated, yet they are a basic police tool. Police officers are currently working in the dark.

What is the minister waiting for? When will he resolve this problem and ensure that our police officers and Canadians are safe now?

[Public Safety, March 12th, 2015]

Mr. Speaker, so much for putting public safety first.

The Conservatives have allowed the RCMP to work with a severely outdated criminal records database for six years. Apparently, it will not be fixed until 2018.

It is great that the minister wants to transition the RCMP to an electronic database—welcome to the 21st century—but what he has done instead is create a disastrous backlog. The police cannot wait another three years for current criminal records. Where is the plan to fix this dangerous situation now?

[Zero Tolerance for Barbaric Cultural Practices Act, March 12th, 2015]

My goodness, the minister is not actively listening this morning, Mr. Speaker. It is rather discouraging.

I rise to speak to this time allocation motion because I take exception to the idea that we in the NDP are not concerned about matters of justice. On the contrary, as the justice critic, I can tell you that every bill introduced in the House by the government is studied carefully. The only difference between the Conservatives and us is that we try to be consistent with the Criminal Code.

What my colleague from Newton—North Delta said quite eloquently is that these provisions already exist. It is not that the NDP does not want to stand up against forced marriage, polygamy and honour crimes, it is that all these provisions already exist. The Conservatives are playing with people's heads, and it is insulting. We have carefully reviewed all the justice bills and we even supported a number of these bills, including the one introduced by the Conservative member for Yukon on fetal alcohol syndrome. Perhaps because we supported it, the Conservatives decided to withdraw it.

[Public Safety, March 11th, 2015]

Mr. Speaker, it is a nice machine, but it takes somebody to input the data.

The Canadian Police Association believes that the RCMP's lack of resources is threatening Canadians' safety. It currently takes two years to update criminal records. The Conservatives' incompetence means that our police officers have to work with an outdated database. They are being asked to fight terrorists and criminals with one hand tied behind their backs.

Will the minister finally do something about this dangerous situation in order to protect our police officers and Canadians?

[Public Safety, March 11th, 2015]

More hot air than action from the government on public safety, Mr. Speaker, and today we have yet another example.

The RCMP criminal database is still seriously backlogged, six years after the Auditor General sounded the alarm.

We are talking about critical information that police rely on, like criminal records not being entered into the database for two years.

This is putting police and Canadians at risk. How could the minister allow this dangerous situation to continue?

[Public Safety, March 9th, 2015]

Mr. Speaker, Canadians and many experts are increasingly concerned about Bill C-51.

Now we can add to that long list Canada's Privacy Commissioner, Daniel Therrien, who said he is very concerned about the repercussions of Bill C-51 on people's privacy and the protection of their personal information. He is calling for better oversight mechanisms for intelligence agencies.

Will the minister listen to the commissioner and will he be open to amendments?

[Tougher Penalties for Child Predators Act, February 25th, 2015]

Mr. Speaker, I take the message to heart. I know that I am one of the guilty people on that front.

The question that I would like to ask my colleague, who is the Liberal justice critic, is as follows.

We spoke about the work that was done in committee. In committee, I was concerned about the only two amendments that the government accepted. They were presented as technical amendments, but in the end, people from the department said that those amendments actually addressed fundamental errors and omissions.

This is the second bill where the government has introduced new provisions and new topics that were not examined by the committee on the very day that we were studying the bill clause by clause. I would like to hear what my colleague has to say about that.

[Tougher Penalties for Child Predators Act, February 25th, 2015]

Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank my colleague for her questions, which could well be the topic of a dissertation.

It is disgraceful that the $10 million in question was not spent, since that money was supposed to be used to provide direct assistance to victims. The Conservatives often say that we on this side of the House do not care about victims. Nevertheless, we are talking about many programs that have proven their worth. They do not cost much, but they provide really good value for money. It seems to me that the Conservatives are completely missing the mark on this.

I would also like to thank my colleague for asking a question about prevention. Asking that question has nothing to do with favouring criminals over victims. On the contrary, I would not want any repeat offenders to be allowed to reintegrate into the community. I am not proud to say that such a registry will be created to inform me of the presence of dangerous people in my community. I would prefer that those people not be in my community. We need to work on that. We have to help the people who can be rehabilitated by using programs that have proven their worth. We need to think about other measures to deal with those who cannot be saved.