Jay Hill

[U.S. Western Hemisphere Travel Initiative, October 24th, 2005]

Mr. Chair, I will be brief because there are at least two other members on the opposition side who would like to ask our Liberal colleague a question.

We heard about some supposed personal interventions that were made on behalf of the Canadian government and Canadians who were concerned about the issue by the Prime Minister to the President of the United States. We have no real proof of that. We will take their word for it. I guess it has actually happened.

The parliamentary secretary has said that he sent out a letter about a week ago. Ironically enough, that letter would have coincided with the request for an emergency debate, not a take note debate, on this very issue by my colleague from New Brunswick Southwest. Suddenly on that very day the parliamentary secretary was prompted to some action and he sent out a letter suggesting that everybody had two weeks to get their comments in. That is the type of leadership we have come to expect from the Liberal government.

The United States Secretary of State, Condoleezza Rice, is in Canada right now. She is fairly high placed with the administration. Could the parliamentary secretary assure us that when the Prime Minister met with her today he raised this issue? If so, what was the reaction and what was said?

Could he bring some information to the debate tonight? If not, will he at least follow the lead of the opposition yet again and commit to raising it tomorrow? My understanding is she will be around then too.

[U.S. Western Hemisphere Travel Initiative, October 24th, 2005]

The Minister of Foreign Affairs.

[U.S. Western Hemisphere Travel Initiative, October 24th, 2005]

Who is heckling now? This is great tonight.

The Prime Minister fails to take a leadership position. My colleague from the Liberal Party is well intentioned in his support of border communities. It is a great idea. However, I do not think it would be necessary for border communities. This is not something that only affects his community in Thunder Bay. It is not something that only affects Windsor, or Niagara Falls or Vancouver or Sumac. This is something that affects the nation. Should there not be some national leadership on this?

[U.S. Western Hemisphere Travel Initiative, October 24th, 2005]

Mr. Chair, I want to refer first to the comments made during the last question and comment session directed toward my colleague from the NDP, by the member for Pickering—Scarborough East. He was concerned that I and some others might be getting too partisan.

The Liberal member who just spoke talked about his support for the mayor from the United States who suggested an initiative for border communities, both from the United States and Canada, to get together to discuss issues such as the passport issue and other issues of mutual concern. That would be a great thing. However, the hon. member from the Liberal caucus has made the point we have tried to make. Where is the leadership on this issue? The member for Pickering—Scarborough East does not want us to get partisan, but there is no leadership. We have yet to hear the Prime Minister speak on this issue.

Earlier another Liberal member made a comment on the fact that he had not heard one question in question period on this. I hope Canadians are watching this tonight. I hope they realize the leadership in the Liberal Party is all about that. If the opposition does not ask a question in question period, it must not be important. That is the Liberals idea of leadership. The Prime Minister cannot possibly take a position on this or communicate to the Americans, even though there is only one week left before the comment period on the initiative expires.

[U.S. Western Hemisphere Travel Initiative, October 24th, 2005]

Do your job for once.

[U.S. Western Hemisphere Travel Initiative, October 24th, 2005]

You have been.

[U.S. Western Hemisphere Travel Initiative, October 24th, 2005]

Mr. Chair, people might look at me and say, “What interest would someone from northeastern British Columbia have in this particular debate about the border issues and specifically about this initiative that would see not only Canadians but Americans would have to carry passports to travel back and forth between our two nations?”

I can say to members that from northeastern British Columbia in my riding the Alaska Highway actually starts in Dawson Creek and it is the main thoroughfare through Yukon to the State of Alaska. As well, over in northwestern British Columbia in the riding of Skeena which adjoins my riding of Prince George--Peace River, there is the Alaska panhandle and there is a lot of traffic between Alaskans and people of northwestern British Columbia.

Therefore, it might seem on the surface a bit surprising, obviously we have a great interest in this particular issue. There is a lot of traffic that goes up both the Alaska Highway and up through the inland passage from ports like Prince Rupert to places like Juneau, Skagway and Haines, Alaska, so I have a lot of interest in that.

I am quite astounded to hear the government members present in the debate tonight actually ask opposition members what they see as the solution to this. One of the solutions I would submit is some leadership on the part of the government.

One of the things that all of us as members of Parliament have been struggling with over the last number of years since 9/11 is the increase in administrative activities in our constituency offices, where we have to deal with passports on behalf of our constituents because the government has not provided sufficient resources even for the number of passports that are being asked for by Canadian citizens right now, let alone if this were to come into play.

I would suggest that we need some leadership on the part of the federal government on this issue. I wonder if my Bloc Québécois colleague would agree that the government has really fumbled the ball on negotiating and working with the Americans to see what exactly is needed and then providing the resources necessary, instead of just sloughing this off to individual members of Parliament to try and pick up the pieces and try to assist Canadians to get their passports.

[Petitions, October 24th, 2005]

Mr. Speaker, it is a pleasure to present a petition, as I have on every occasion this fall, this time on behalf of residents of Cobourg, Port Hope, Smiths Falls, Dundas, Stoney Creek, Kingsville, St. Thomas, Thornhill and a number of other communities too numerous to mention.

All these citizens are concerned that on average about 2,000 children are adopted from other countries and brought to Canada each year, and that despite this fact, other countries, namely the United States of America and Great Britain, provide automatic citizenship for these young children and our country does not.

Therefore, the petitioners call upon Parliament to immediately enact legislation to grant automatic citizenship to minors adopted from other countries by Canadian citizens with this citizenship being immediately granted upon the finalization of the adoption.

I note that the minister said that he would bring forward stand alone legislation to actually accomplish this and I think it is high time he acts upon that commitment.

[Criminal Code, October 21st, 2005]

A gun? Oh, I see. If she had used a gun and shot him and he died it might have been different. Well, she was convicted of manslaughter but because she stabbed him and he died she was given house arrest. She did not serve one day in jail.

There have been thousands of cases like that over the last 9 years, and yet that member has the audacity to stand up and pretend that our justice system has any justice in it.

[Criminal Code, October 21st, 2005]

Mr. Speaker, that was unbelievable. I believe he is the Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Justice in this country so it is hard to believe that is the extent of his understanding of what is happening in the real world outside this chamber.

I never mentioned mandatory minimums. If he had actually listened to my remarks before he rushed into the chamber to stand on his feet he would have heard me talking about the use of conditional sentencing. He said that manslaughter carries a mandatory minimum of four years. We have had hundreds of cases in this country involving manslaughter or second degree murder and the people have not served one day in jail.

About a year or so ago there was what I consider an infamous case in my riding in a small community close to the city of Prince George. The sentence only came down in the last month or so. Norman Wicks of Vanderhoof was not a perfect fellow. He had a number of lovers, in addition to being married, but I do not know whether that was a reason to murder him. One of his lovers, Teresa Senner, found out about his affairs and became enraged. She stabbed him in the groin and he bled to death.