Jean Crowder

[Aboriginal Affairs, June 3rd, 2013]

Mr. Speaker, in January, as protests occurred across Canada, the Prime Minister said he would take responsibility for progress on aboriginal issues.

Months later, where are we? First nations, Inuit and Metis are wondering if the government agreed to change its ways while having absolutely no intention of following through. The only action we have seen from the government is pushing through its own legislative agenda that first nations object to.

When is the government going to live up to its promises?

[Economic Action Plan 2013 Act, No. 1, June 3rd, 2013]

Mr. Speaker, I thank the member for that very thorough speech. One point she touched upon in her speech was the issue of the CBC, the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation. In my riding, Nanaimo—Cowichan, on Vancouver Island, the CBC is much loved. I have received hundreds of emails expressing concern about what Bill C-60 proposes to do with regard to the CBC. In fact, a number of people have raised concerns about having far too much government control over the CBC in terms of its collective bargaining and in terms of perhaps interfering in journalistic freedom.

The NDP proposed an amendment to the bill that would have seen us hive off the aspect dealing with the CBC as a separate piece of legislation, which would then have enabled us to debate it fully and study it fully at committee.

I wonder if the member would comment specifically about the government's intent to limit debate and to limit scrutiny of these key pieces of legislation that would be impacted by Bill C-60.

[Economic Action Plan 2013 Act, No. 1, June 3rd, 2013]

Mr. Speaker, the member rightly points out the fact that, first, this is a budget implementation bill that would amend 49 different pieces of legislation; and second, we just finished voting on time allocation, which will limit our ability to study the impacts of this particular piece of legislation.

The member noted a number of ways that Canadians would be impacted by this legislation. Could he comment on the fact that, once again, we are not going to have time to deal with the matters that are before this House in a way that would allow us to determine the impact and the longer-range consequences?

[Economic Action Plan 2013 Act, No. 1, June 3rd, 2013]

Mr. Speaker, it is interesting to hear the minister attempt to justify shutting down debate once again. As the member for Parkdale—High Park said, it has been 39 times that the government has limited the ability of parliamentarians to do their job. In this case, we have only had one hour of debate on the bill at this stage of its reading.

We are talking about a bill that is 115 pages long and amends 49 different pieces of legislation. When the bill had second reading, there was time allocation on that phase. Then it was referred to committees where people were unable to amend the bill. They had very limited time to call witnesses. In some cases, some committees only had one meeting on the legislation. Therefore, I hardly think we have had adequate time to give the bill the kind of study it requires. We saw this with the budget bill and now the budget implementation act.

As well, in this case, the government talks about how it needs to get this moving. Why did it not bring the bill forward earlier? The government controls the agenda for when a bill is called before the House for debate. It had ample opportunity to bring the bill forward so we would have the opportunity to study it in-depth and to call witnesses. Again, as the member for Parkdale—High Park pointed out, there are a number of different critical pieces of legislation that would be impacted by this, for example, the amalgamation of CIDA with foreign affairs and some changes to the way the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation would be able to operate.

Why does the minister think parliamentarians should not have the opportunity to provide due diligence for legislation that will have impact so many other pieces of legislation?

[Criminal Code, May 31st, 2013]

Mr. Speaker, I want to begin by acknowledging that New Democrats will be supporting this private member's bill. I want to commend the member for Red Deer for being so persistent in bringing it forward. I know he has worked on it for a number of years. I also think it speaks to the fact that we as parliamentarians do respond to our constituents. My understanding is that the member for Red Deer brought this forward as a result of an incident in his riding.

Others have mentioned it, but what Bill C-444 does is to propose to amend article 130 of the Criminal Code, to establish that personating a police officer or public officer for the purposes of committing another offence must be considered by a court to be an aggravating circumstance for sentencing purposes. A number of other members have pointed this out, but I think it bears repeating. It is essential that the public have absolute confidence and are able to trust that when dealing with a police officer, the person is actually a police officer.

Many of us, as parents, have told our children that if they are in trouble or get lost when they are out and about, they should go to a police officer. We need to have confidence that it is police officers we are sending our children to.

One reason that confidence and trust is important is the fact that we have vulnerable populations. I know the member for Red Deer specifically talked about a young girl. I also want to touch on seniors because my riding of Nanaimo—Cowichan has a higher than provincial average of seniors. It is a very popular place for people to retire to. Sometimes seniors end up becoming part of the vulnerable population because people who have less than honourable intentions target them specifically for criminal activities. Unfortunately, people personating police officers go to their doors.

I went to the Vancouver Police Department's website and read its tips for seniors when dealing with people at the door. The website pointed out that for most crimes, seniors are the least victimized, so I would reassure seniors that they are not often a major target for criminal activity. However, it adversely affects seniors in a way that does not affect others in the population because seniors are often on a fixed income and have much greater difficulty replacing money or property when they have been targeted for criminal activity.

There are a couple of tips that the Vancouver Police Department suggest. When someone goes to a senior's door, the first thing they should do is to look through the peephole or a glass window that may be on the side of the door to verify who is on the doorstep. If it is somebody purporting to be a police officer and they have any discomfort at all, they should call 911 or contact the police department to verify he or she is actually an officer.

[Criminal Code, May 31st, 2013]

Mr. Speaker, I thank the member for bringing the bill forward. As he mentioned in his speech, he has brought it forward a number of times. The NDP will be supporting it and this is one of those rare moments in the House where we can work together.

I know he mentioned this in his speech, but I would like him to address this because it is an important aspect of the bill. Part of this is really about protecting our police forces and their reputations. I will touch on it in my own speech, but I know that it is important for seniors, when an officer presents him or herself at their doorstep, to have some confidence that it is an officer of the law. Although it speaks to sentencing, this particular piece of legislation can be a deterrent. It can protect those reputations and give seniors some confidence that there are consequences to someone impersonating a peace officer.

[Petitions, May 31st, 2013]

Mr. Speaker, the third and final petition is signed by hundreds of people from my riding of Nanaimo—Cowichan.

The petitioners call upon Parliament to impose a moratorium on the release of genetically modified alfalfa in order to allow a proper review of the impact on farmers in Canada.

[Petitions, May 31st, 2013]

Mr. Speaker, the second petition calls upon the Parliament of Canada to amend the Food and Drugs Act so that mandatory labelling for genetically modified foods is in place.

[Petitions, May 31st, 2013]

Mr. Speaker, I have three petitions to present.

The first petition calls upon the Parliament of Canada to maintain funding for old age security and make the requisite investments in the guaranteed income supplement to lift every senior out of poverty.

[Ethics, May 31st, 2013]

Mr. Speaker, simple questions demand simple answers and we simply do not get them.

Of the 15 senators who spent the most on travel during the reporting quarter for the last election, 10 are Liberal and 5 are Conservative. Does the government believe it was right for its senators to be receiving salary and expenses from public funds while campaigning for the Conservative Party during the last election?