Harold Albrecht

[Consumer Product Safety, December 4th, 2009]

Mr. Speaker, while the Liberal leader has been trying to divert attention from his inability to lead his party, his colleagues over in the Senate were maliciously tearing apart our consumer protection bill. That is a shame.

Could the hon. Minister of Health please inform this House and Canadian consumers what this will mean for them?

[Fairness for the Self-Employed Act, December 4th, 2009]

Mr. Speaker, I listened with great interest to the member's speech. One thing I am a little saddened by is we are very close to Christmas and she seems so grumpy about this issue.

There are a lot of self-employed individuals in my riding. We have been clear for well over a year that this is one of the policies we would like to implement, and they have called for this change. It is a very positive change that will make a big difference for a lot of self-employed individuals. In Quebec there will be benefits for sickness and compassionate care.

Many associations have come out clearly in favour of the changes in this legislation. I am sure the member is aware of the Alliance of Canadian Cinema, Television and Radio Artists. It has said:

This is a positive first step by the federal government and so we are urging all parties to support the extension of parental leave benefits to all workers.

How can she stand in this place and say the option should be removed? It is an option that self-employed people can opt into it or not. How can she say she wants to remove a very good option for those who are self-employed in Canada?

[Counselling or Aiding Suicide, November 27th, 2009]

Mr. Speaker, today I rise to thank the House for the unanimous support it offered last week for Motion No. 388, my motion to update Canada's Criminal Code.

Nadia Kajouji was a depressed 18-year-old student when she was targeted by an Internet predator. In her vulnerable state, she did not survive the assault. The tragedy of Nadia's story gripped each one of us. Eighteen months later, no charges have been laid.

The unanimous support of the House shows that hon. members can work together in good faith. It shows that common sense can cross party lines. It shows that the government would enjoy broad support if it took action on this file.

On behalf of Nadia's father Mohamed, her brother Marc, her mother Deborah, and on behalf of all Canadians suffering from depression, and vulnerable youth dealing with seemingly insurmountable obstacles, I thank all hon. members for giving the motion fair consideration and for their ongoing support.

[Jewish Canadians, November 20th, 2009]

Mr. Speaker, Jewish Canadians know that our government is standing up against anti-Semitism in all its forms.

We created the security infrastructure pilot program, which helps protect synagogues and Jewish community centres from anti-Semitic attacks and vandalism.

We provided $2.5 million to commemorate the St. Louis incident, a sad moment in Canadian history when a previous government under Prime Minister Mackenzie King turned away Jews seeking refuge from the Holocaust.

We joined the international Holocaust task force. This task force was set up when the previous government held office; but inexplicably, it refused to join.

We cut off funding to the anti-Semitic Canadian Arab Federation, over Liberal protests. We led the world in boycotting the anti-Semitic Durban II conference.

Maybe that is why Jewish Canadians are increasingly seeking the Conservative Party as their best hope in the fight against the scourge of anti-Semitism at home and abroad.

[Petitions, November 16th, 2009]

Mr. Speaker, I have the honour to present a petition signed by roughly 2,000 people from virtually all across Canada.

The petitioners call upon Canada to enable prosecution of those who encourage or counsel someone to commit suicide by updating our Criminal Code to reflect the new realities of 21st century broadband access and to fund education programs to help Canada's vulnerable youth protect themselves from online predators and find appropriate community support resources.

[Employment Insurance, November 6th, 2009]

Mr. Speaker, unemployed long-tenured workers are among the hardest hit by the global recession. These are Canadians who have worked hard, paid premiums for years and need extra support while they search for new employment. Our Conservative government took concrete action to help them by introducing Bill C-50.

Could the Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Human Resources please update this House on the status of this important bill that will provide much-needed support for these hard-working Canadians?

[Criminal Code, November 5th, 2009]

Madam Speaker, I want to thank my colleagues for their support of Motion No. 388.

I appreciate the opportunity to address this crucial issue of Internet predators. These individuals presume to be able to hide behind the anonymity of the Internet, all the while carrying out their criminal activities, intent upon coaxing vulnerable youth to throw away the incredible potential that life holds for them.

The current Criminal Code of Canada, in section 241, does make it illegal to counsel someone to commit suicide and provides penalties of up to 14 years of imprisonment for someone convicted of the same. However, the current Criminal Code does not explicitly state that a person who commits an offence under section 241 by means of telecommunications, the Internet or a computer system is also guilty of an offence under that section.

Youth suicide is a troubling matter. Here in Canada it is the second highest cause of death for youth aged 10 to 24. Each year, on average, 294 Canadian youth die from suicide. Motion No. 388 will not stop all youth suicide, nor is it the only initiative that government should consider.

In my research surrounding Motion No. 388, thankfully I have become aware of many great initiatives that seek to give positive help, hope and encouragement to those who struggle. Suicide prevention councils and websites such as YLC, Your Life Counts, are doing great work to help our youth, but they need more resources to address this pressing need.

We have received over 11,000 signatures from Canadians who are asking for changes to our law and for resources to help vulnerable youth. I received a letter from a secondary school in Brampton, which said:

Over 400 members of our student body signed the petition. The number of signatures shows that your fight for those who are unable to speak for themselves is highly supported by the school community.

Our youth are asking us to act.

The challenges of moving into adulthood are immense. During these times, our youth need positive messages of hope and encouragement, not destructive messages by someone lurking with evil intent.

Over a year and a half ago, Nadia Kajouji, a young woman studying at Carleton University right here in Ottawa, sadly ended her life at the encouragement of an Internet predator. The man, who impersonated a young woman in order to deceive Nadia, has admitted to U.S. police that he had used the Internet to coax at least five different people to commit suicide.

A premeditated act with criminal intent is responsible for cutting short the life of a young woman who had begun her studies to pursue a career in law and politics. She never achieved her goals. I have met her mother, her father and her brother, and they are devastated.

Stories like this make it necessary to clarify our laws in order to remove any doubt surrounding the issue of counselling to commit suicide. In our Internet age, we have an obligation to protect vulnerable youth.

Some members of this House and some legal professionals believe that our existing laws already make this behaviour a crime. I would like to believe they are correct, but the predator who drove Nadia to her death remains free without charges. If this crime is already covered under section 241 of Canada's Criminal Code, why have no charges been laid?

There are far too many unanswered questions. There are conflicting reports as to why no charges have been laid. It is my belief that if section 241 explicitly stated that suicide counselling includes the use of the Internet, there would not have been such a long period of inaction and uncertainty on the part of our law enforcement agencies.

Some members of this House are concerned that by adding the words “including via telecommunications, the Internet or a computer system”, we may be inadvertently excluding other methods of suicide counselling. If for greater clarity we add certain current technologies, such as the Internet, will that automatically exclude others? That is a fair question.

These additions that I am suggesting are not meant to be an exhaustive list. Other jurisdictions, such as Australia and a number of the United States, have found ways to avoid that pitfall. By including words such as “including but not limited to”, we could make it clear that this motion does not intend to provide an exhaustive list that may inadvertently exclude other methods.

The uncertainty in the current Criminal Code may be the cause for any hesitation on the part of our law enforcement agencies. Therefore, this clarification is needed.

As Nadia's grieving mother noted:

as long as there are predators who believe the Internet is some kind of exclusive sanctuary and as long as there are police officers who believe, for some unwritten reason, that the Internet is not governed by our existing laws, this clarification is very much needed.

I call upon all members to join me in support of Motion No. 388 in order to provide the protection that our youth deserve.

[Fairness for the Self-Employed Act, November 5th, 2009]

Mr. Speaker, the Minister of Human Resources made a great speech outlining the benefits of Bill C-56. Recently, the House also passed Bill C-50, which is currently in the Senate. It makes a big difference for those long-tenured workers who are laid off.

I think we can all agree that the best way to help unemployed people is to help them find a new job. When I go door to door in my riding, once in a while I run into someone who has lost his or her job but has gone out and started his or her own business. It is clear that this initiative will really help these people.

How could any MP stand in this place and oppose the measures that are in this great bill?

[Employment Insurance Act, November 3rd, 2009]

Mr. Speaker, the previous speaker has talked about squandering the surplus. Only a Liberal could talk about paying down debt as squandering the surplus. We paid down $37 billion in debt, and he continually refuses to acknowledge that.

How can he vote against these measures, which would definitely help people who have paid into EI for 20 or 30 years and who actually deserve these benefits if they are now looking for jobs? He knows that in this environment it takes longer to find a job, so adding these extra weeks is certainly going to help them.

I would like the member to respond to that.

[Employment Insurance Act, November 3rd, 2009]

Mr. Speaker, it has been over an hour since we heard the speech from the member, but if one could judge from the volume of her speech it is certainly obvious that she is very passionate about this issue.

It is important to remind Canadians that Bill C-50 proposes to add an extension of between 5 to 20 extra weeks to help long-tenured workers access employment insurance benefits.

All Canadians would agree that the best way to help unemployed Canadians is to help them get back to work. We have initiated a number of plans: $500 million for training long-tenured workers, $1.5 billion for those on EI who would not normally qualify, and many others.

How can the member opposite look into the eyes of those in her province who are unemployed, who have in some cases worked for many years, some decades, who would qualify for employment benefits under this bill and say, “I'm sorry. You don't qualify because I voted against the measure?”

I would like her answer to that.