Hélène LeBlanc

[Fighting Foreign Corruption Act, June 18th, 2013]

Mr. Speaker, in its 2012 report, Transparency International indicated that active enforcement was a real way of combatting this type of foreign bribery. We also know that the RCMP is the body responsible for conducting these investigations and reporting the facts.

I would like to know what my colleague thinks about the cuts that have been made to the Canada Border Services Agency and the RCMP in successive budgets.

Can he elaborate on that?

[Tackling Contraband Tobacco Act, June 13th, 2013]

Mr. Speaker, I thank my hon. colleague for the question.

She raised the issue of prevention. I agree that one of the problems is indeed supply and demand. She also mentioned the health aspect. As another member mentioned earlier, the federal government cut funding for anti-smoking programs.

This bill is more about simply amending the Criminal Code. However, we need to take a holistic approach in order to determine who is involved in this market on both ends—both the buying and selling. That is a very good point, and it also relates to our economy.

[Tackling Contraband Tobacco Act, June 13th, 2013]

Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague, who does an excellent job as our science and technology critic. He raised a very important point about good intentions. Having good intentions is commendable.

However, we have questions about how the bill will be enforced. My colleague raised the point that contraband cigarettes are no longer a local issue, but that they have become national and international issues. How can we successfully tackle contraband?

I want to point out that it will be the same thing with Bill C-56, which deals with counterfeit goods, if we do not come up with measures to back up our plans.

[Tackling Contraband Tobacco Act, June 13th, 2013]

Mr. Speaker, cigarettes are a scourge. There is no doubt about that. They are a health hazard and lead to serious addiction.

Over the years, measures have been taken to control tobacco as much as possible and to dissuade people from taking up smoking. As some of my colleagues mentioned, very young people will start smoking despite all of the warnings, and they will often be far more affected by their dependence on cigarettes.

The NDP also recognizes that contraband cigarettes—the illegal sale of cigarettes—is also a scourge because they are often sold for less and can encourage new smokers and young smokers. Contraband cigarettes help perpetuate the negative impact of smoking.

I have the honour and privilege of representing the riding of LaSalle—Émard, which is on the Island of Montreal, in Quebec. There are a large number of convenience store owners in my riding. I had the opportunity to meet with the convenience store association, whose members are feeling the economic impact of contraband cigarettes. That is what is so paradoxical about this product, which is such a health hazard. The government is making money off it and trying to control it at the same time. Convenience store owners are feeling the economic impact of contraband cigarettes. Quebec and Ontario are often affected.

Documents provided by the Library of Parliament indicate that, under current laws, namely the Excise Act, 2001 and the Criminal Code, cigarette seizures by the RCMP have been increasing over time. There has been a tremendous increase. The number of seizures was quite low between 2001 and 2004, and then it suddenly skyrocketed.

The legislative summary suggests that law enforcement priorities may have played a role as well. Trafficking in contraband cigarettes has increased significantly and not just Canadian cigarettes, but imported cigarettes as well. Under the current regime, the RCMP can already make major seizures. We can see that in the statistics in the chart, which is very clear and quite graphic. Dealing with this scourge was a priority.

We must debate Bill S-16, An Act to amend the Criminal Code (trafficking in contraband tobacco), which is also called the Tackling Contraband Tobacco Act. This bill originated in the Senate and seeks to create a special provision on contraband tobacco. Again, I am not denying the fact that this is a scourge and that we must deal with it here in the House. However, I want to talk about the laws currently in effect to deal with this problem. Under the current legislative regime, RCMP seizures have gone up.

We saw that tackling contraband cigarettes may have been made a priority. That is why I am puzzled. I am not saying that I do not support Bill S-16, but I am wondering about the measures already in place that seem to be doing the job.

As I mentioned, the Excise Act, 2001, is in effect and we also have the Criminal Code.

Charges under the Criminal Code may include, but are not limited to: fraud, conspiracy, conspiracy to commit offences, participation in activities of criminal organization, and possession of property obtained by crime.

Under the Excise Act, 2001, the offences are:

...selling, offering for sale, purchasing or possessing unpackaged or non-stamped raw leaf tobacco (section 30) and the possession, sale or offering for sale of tobacco products that are not stamped (section 32), both of which are “hybrid offences”.

The Excise Act, 2001, already provides specifics that truly tackle the illegal sale of tobacco.

We are still talking about the enforcement and impact of Bill S-16. The legislative summary goes on to say:

Criminal enforcement under the Excise Act, 2001 may be carried out by “any police force in Canada” that is designated according to certain conditions. It appears that the RCMP is the force designated as such. In comparison, all police forces may enforce Criminal Code provisions.

This covers quite a bit in terms of the enforcement and impact of existing legislation.

The parliamentary secretary also talked about something mentioned in the legislative summary:

The Standing Senate Committee on Legal and Constitutional Affairs submitted observations with its report on the bill, suggesting that the government consider providing provincial police with enforcement powers under the Excise Act, 2001, as well as under the Customs Act.

Once again, this is about problems related to enforcing the law.

I would like to share an interesting example. It is important to understand that a number of stakeholders are involved in enforcing this law. However, a number of stakeholders also find themselves on the other side of the law, that is, breaking the law.

Coming back to the legislative summary, it states:

For example, in the Cornwall area, there are various efforts such as joint investigative units and a task force to encourage collaboration between various enforcement organizations such as the RCMP, the Canada Border Services Agency, the Ontario Provincial Police, the Cornwall Community Police Service and the Akwesasne Mohawk Police Service.

In my opinion, that is a good example of co-operation between all stakeholders in order to enforce various laws that fight contraband.

In conclusion, I would like to point out that the NDP takes the problem of tobacco contraband in Canada seriously. I mentioned this in my introduction and I am saying it again now.

Tobacco contraband is a problem that affects health and public safety, tax revenues and the profitability of small businesses, as I already pointed out. For that reason, the NDP has asked the federal government to take action on this issue and to co-operate with the communities affected the most. That is very important.

The government must provide the necessary resources to the Canada Border Services Agency and the RCMP in order to properly deal with the problem because it is also an international issue.

Unfortunately, as we saw in the most recent budget, the government did not. The cuts will hinder the fight against counterfeiting and contraband.

[Tackling Contraband Tobacco Act, June 13th, 2013]

Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague for his speech. He touched on some very interesting points that are important to me as well.

He spoke about mandatory minimum sentences and the impact they have, and he also spoke about the impact that contraband tobacco has on small and medium-sized businesses. We are actually talking about small and very small businesses. I am sure he has those in his riding.

Could he speak more about those two points he raised in his speech?

[Tackling Contraband Tobacco Act, June 13th, 2013]

Mr. Speaker, I want to thank the parliamentary secretary for her speech.

The NDP and I recognize that cigarettes and contraband cigarettes are a scourge. We have seen some disturbing statistics on the rise in this type of trafficking.

However, the Excise Act, 2001, and the Criminal Code already cover all these offences. Bill S-16 seems to be redundant.

I would like to know why the government decided to introduce Bill S-16 instead of reviewing and enforcing the comprehensive laws that are in effect, such as the Excise Act, 2001, and the Criminal Code. What is the motivation behind Bill S-16?

[Combating Counterfeit Products Act, June 13th, 2013]

Mr. Speaker, I thank the member for Tobique—Mactaquac for his comments. I wanted to say his riding name, which I think is very interesting.

The member gave us a lot to think about in committee, as did his Conservative Party colleagues.

How many committee meetings does the member think it will take to address the points he and other committees raised? I think it will take at least three or four, if not more.

[Combating Counterfeit Products Act, June 13th, 2013]

Mr. Speaker, I thank the member who just spoke. He gave a rather exhaustive overview of the bill.

He mentioned the resources, as we did, and the techniques available to detect counterfeiting, since it is becoming increasingly complicated to do so.

Does the government plan on giving the Canada Border Services Agency this type of technology and investing in the kinds of resources needed to properly, effectively and accurately detect counterfeiting?

[Combating Counterfeit Products Act, June 12th, 2013]

Mr. Speaker, I would like to continue along those same lines, because this is a bill I have been waiting for since it was introduced on March 1, 2013. A study was conducted on intellectual property.

We met with a number of stakeholders who mentioned the importance of a bill like this one in its current form. Since March 1, I have been meeting with people who raised questions about the enforcement of this bill and about whether all of the right protections have been proposed, namely protecting consumers and the rights of copyright holders.

I would like to ask my colleague about the work done in committee. We are coming to the end of the session. I would like him to talk about that and about the important role committees play in studying bills.

[Combating Counterfeit Products Act, June 12th, 2013]

Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank my colleague from Drummond for his speech. I know his area quite well, since it borders my home region in central Quebec.

I would like to speak some more about the industrial landscape of Canada in recent decades, in order to explain the proliferation of counterfeiting. For several years, Canada's manufacturing sector has suffered significant setbacks. Many businesses in the area represented by my colleague have had to shut down, much the same as in my region. Canada's manufacturing has shifted to foreign markets, whether in China or elsewhere. This outsourcing of Canadian jobs and production means that goods from other countries may well be made differently from those made by Canadian businesses.

I would also point out that Canadian incomes have stagnated over the past several years. Canadians are also grappling with high debt, which encourages consumers to look for low-priced attractive products. However, as mentioned by the member for Durham, these products can cause major health and safety problems. These two issues are very troubling.

I would like my colleague to tell me how manufacturing businesses in his region have been affected over the last few years.