Jack Harris

[Privacy, June 10th, 2013]

Mr. Speaker, we are obviously going to need to see those directives.

PRISM, the U.S. government program that collects information from places like Google, Apple and Facebook, has been making headlines around the world. People are concerned. In the U.K., the government has committed to report to Parliament about its use of PRISM.

Is Canada's Communications Security Establishment making use of information from PRISM? If so, will the government report this use to Parliament, as the British government is doing?

[Privacy, June 10th, 2013]

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

There are reports today that the minister has authorized domestic monitoring by the CSE.

Now, the National Defence Act says that the activities of CSE “shall not be directed at Canadians or any person in Canada”. I want the minister to listen carefully. Can the government confirm that the CSE has not been collecting data on the communications of Canadians?

[Privacy, June 10th, 2013]

Mr. Speaker, we are hearing what we think is a bit of doublespeak from the minister. The reports—

[Ethics, June 7th, 2013]

Mr. Speaker, does the Prime Minister's Office keep any records about disbursements from this fund, and will the government make these records public?

[Expansion and Conservation of Canada’s National Parks Act, June 6th, 2013]

Mr. Speaker, I would remind the minister that we are not in the Senate, and we have had no debate on this.

I am motivated to remark on the comments by my colleague from Halifax, who asked what is really going on in relation to this bill.

If we look at the preamble to the bill, it talks about amending it to ensure that, for the first time, I think, the Canada National Parks Act is subservient to any other legislation of Canada. Why is this being talked about in a bill that is supposed to set up a new reserve? Why would that vehicle be used to open a debate about the whole nature of how strong the commitment to national parks is in this country?

[Petitions, June 6th, 2013]

Mr. Speaker, I have the honour to present a petition on behalf of a number of residents of my constituency of St. John's East and other ridings in Newfoundland and Labrador. The petitioners are calling on the Government of Canada to reverse the decision to close the Canadian Coast Guard Maritime Rescue Centre in St. John's, Newfoundland and Labrador, to reinstate the staff and restore its full services.

These residents and many others in Newfoundland and Labrador are still outraged and concerned that the Government of Canada has closed this very valuable rescue coordinating facility in St. John's that has participated actively in saving lives for many years.

[National Defence, June 4th, 2013]

Mr. Speaker, we learned yesterday that the defence minister used the independent National Investigative Service to probe an alleged leak that turned out to be from a U.S. Navy press release. Now we learn the military's elite police force has also been used to investigate the release of embarrassing information on the country's top general.

Could the Minister of National Defence tell us if the NIS is being used as it should be, or is it being used by the minister as a tool to go after those who embarrass him or his department in the media?

[National Defence, June 3rd, 2013]

Mr. Speaker, undue political interference is not just happening at the PMO. The office of the Minister of National Defence requested that the independent national investigative service track down how a defence journalist got information on a military exercise with our allies. Of course, the information came from a U.S. Navy press release, a fact noted in the story.

Why did the minister push the independent NIS, a branch of the military police, to go after a journalist? Does the minister have a problem with the media reporting on the facts?

[Safer Witnesses Act, May 30th, 2013]

Mr. Speaker, I want to thank the member for his contribution to the debate. I agree with him. It would open up the program and ensure there would be more witnesses protected under the program. That is why we support it.

It would be done by expanding the criteria to national security and national defence or other public safety agencies that could refer witnesses to the program and by expanding it to include youth gang members. We are anticipating growth in this program.

However, as early as 2007, it was identified that there were inadequate resources available. Why are we standing pat on that and whistling past the graveyard, as I call it, with respect to the need for funding? We are hearing time and again from members from his party that there is no need for any new money, yet we are talking about expanding the program, doubling it from 90 to 180 days. Where is the connection?

[Safer Witnesses Act, May 30th, 2013]

Mr. Speaker, I want to thank my colleague for pointing that out. It is clearly there on the website.

Commissioner Todd Shean said that the RCMP was comfortable that it could have an effective program. That is not to say that it would be adequate for all the communities in the country. The RCMP acknowledged that investigations would suffer. That would be at the local community level, and when we have the police boards that look after these communities across the country saying the same thing, I have to worry, frankly.

I appreciate my colleague pointing out that website quote. It is something the RCMP itself acknowledges.

There is logic to this, as well. If we increase the eligibility, more people will be invited to participate because of the broader criterion. More people would be able to apply, but without more money, we would have a crunch.