Irwin Cotler

[Sponsorship Program, June 14th, 2005]

Mr. Speaker, we have shown and will continue to show support for Justice Gomery against any allegations of lack of objectivity on his part, because we have every confidence in the Gomery commission.

[Sponsorship Program, June 14th, 2005]

Mr. Speaker, perhaps the leader of the Bloc does not like my saying: evil to him who evil thinks., but I will repeat it because there was no agreement, no secret, period.

[Sponsorship Program, June 14th, 2005]

Mr. Speaker, there was no guarantee, nor secret deal nor agreement, as I have said. Honni soit qui mal y pense evil to him who evil thinks. We have supported Justice Gomery and will continue to do so. We have blocked all attempts to delay the commission and we will oppose any similar ones that may arise.

[Sponsorship Program, June 14th, 2005]

Mr. Speaker, there was no secret deal. There was no pact and as they say “Honni soit qui mal y pense”. There was no deal and there was no accord.

[Civil Marriage Act, June 10th, 2005]

Mr. Speaker, I would recommend to the hon. member to read the Supreme Court decision. If he read that Supreme Court decision, he would see that the Supreme Court refers to protection of religion as an expansive freedom. Indeed, former Chief Justice Brian Dickson of the Supreme Court of Canada referred to freedom of religion as the firstness of our freedom.

We will protect freedom of religion within our jurisdiction. The provinces will protect freedom of religion within their jurisdiction. We invited them to do that.

What we have is a compelling protection for freedom of religion in our law, in our jurisprudence and in this draft legislation.

[Civil Marriage Act, June 10th, 2005]

Mr. Speaker, I agree that it will have an impact on rights and freedoms. It will protect rights and freedoms. It will protect both equality and religious freedom.

I have continued to say that the legislation is anchored in the rule of law, in the charter and in the jurisprudence of this country which protect both equality and religious freedom.

We remain open. If there are any amendments that can give further certainty to the protections already there, we are prepared, within the democratic process, to consider such amendments.

[Civil Marriage Act, June 9th, 2005]

Mr. Speaker, the member opposite should think before he speaks.

With respect to the question of religious protection, I said that we would not trench on provincial jurisdiction. I said that we were open to any amendments that are compatible with the principles of the bill, that are sound and that are compatible with our federal jurisdiction.

With respect to rushing the bill through, the committee, along with its predecessor committee, has already heard from over 500 witnesses, has received 300 written submissions, and court decisions in hearings in eight provinces and territories, the Supreme Court of Canada and second reading.

The bill has been studied to death and we are still prepared--

[Civil Marriage Act, June 9th, 2005]

Mr. Speaker, it is the comments by the member opposite that are misleading Canadians.

Our legislation is in accordance with the two foundational principles set forth by the Supreme Court and eight jurisdictions of the country with respect to the protection of equality rights and the protection of religious freedom. We still say that the bill is sound in principle.

We are open to any amendments for further certainty but the foundational principles are there and they protect both equality and religious freedom.

[Justice, June 8th, 2005]

Mr. Speaker, we have heard the voices. We are responsive to them, but the matter is within the jurisdiction with respect to the particular legislation regarding the Minister of Health. In that regard, he has superintending authority. I am in discussion with him and we will bring forth the appropriate response.

[Justice, June 8th, 2005]

Mr. Speaker, we are as concerned as the opposition with respect to the saving of lives with regard to crystal meth. The matter is now in discussion not only among the justice ministers and the provincial ministers in the west, but as well with regard to my colleague the Minister of Health. As I indicated, we will be responding appropriately with regard to that kind of classification.