Jim Abbott

[Correctional Services Canada, December 15th, 1999]

Mr. Speaker, it is gratifying to know there is at least one person in Canada who has not seen this report, the solicitor general. This report goes on to state: “The over-utilization of bulletproof glass may give the illusion of openness, but at the same time reduces human contact and hinders effective intervention”.

I wonder what the solicitor general would like to say to the victims of crime who are looking at these perpetrators and wondering why there is even consideration of no armed guards, no razor wire fences, institutions complete with golf courses and riding stables—

[Correctional Services Canada, December 15th, 1999]

Mr. Speaker, do you feel lucky? If you have been convicted and sentenced to the new Club Fed, you are darn right you do. The task force on security has recommended that “the majority of institutions be classified as multilevel—consisting of maximum, medium and minimum security inmates”. It is kind of like a con condo by Correctional Services Canada.

Does the solicitor general agree with the task force, yes or no?

[Prisons, December 14th, 1999]

Mr. Speaker, in the same correction survey I just referred to over 80% of the frontline staff said their stress level was not reduced one bit with his drug strategy.

What is the minister saying to these men and women who put their lives on the line when they see him padding his constituency with this $2.5 million pork?

[Prisons, December 14th, 1999]

Mr. Speaker, 70% of the solicitor general's corrections staff said that his drug strategy was a failure. The only thing that he is doing is padding his own constituency with this $2.5 million boondoggle.

Why will the minister continue in this way? Why does he arm himself only with pork to fight drugs?

[Prisons, December 13th, 1999]

Mr. Speaker, an internal Correctional Service Canada survey obtained through access to information proves that the prison drug prevention strategy is a failure. Correctional Service Canada staff confirmed what the Reform Party has been saying for months. Only 31% of them rated the drug strategy as successful. In other words, almost 70% of his own staff think the program is a failure.

When was the solicitor general planning to tell Canadians that his drug strategy plan is an abject failure?

[Nisga'A Final Agreement Act, December 6th, 1999]

moved:

Motion No. 183

That Bill C-9 be amended by adding after line 29 on page 7 the following new clause:

“20.1 (1) On the expiration of ten years after the coming into force of this Act, the provisions contained herein shall be referred to such committee of both Houses of Parliament as may be designated or established by Parliament for that purpose.

(2) The committee designated or established by Parliament for the purpose of subsection (1) shall, as soon as practicable, undertake a comprehensive review of the provisions and operation of this Act and, shall within one year after the review is undertaken, submit a report to Parliament.”

[Nisga'A Final Agreement Act, December 6th, 1999]

moved:

Motion No. 176

That Bill C-9 be amended by adding after line 29 on page 7 the following new clause:

“20.1 (1) On the expiration of ten years after the coming into force of this Act, the provisions contained herein shall be referred to such committee of the House of Commons, of the Senate, or of both Houses of Parliament as may be designated or established by Parliament for that purpose.

(2) The committee designated or established by Parliament for the purpose of subsection (1) shall, as soon as practicable, undertake a comprehensive review of the provisions and operation of this Act and, shall within one year after the review is undertaken, submit a report to Parliament.”

[Rcmp, December 6th, 1999]

Mr. Speaker, it is a question of confidence on the part of Canadians. I read from the briefing note “With respect to the other allegations pertaining to CAIPS and corruption, our investigation is in its final stages and is expected to be concluded this October”.

I repeat my question. This being December 6, the RCMP said it would be reporting on this in October. Has the minister received the report, yes or no? What is holding things up? How can we have any confidence in this minister?

[Rcmp, December 6th, 1999]

Mr. Speaker, the solicitor general has assured the House that the RCMP are looking into allegations of corruption in the Hong Kong visa office and allegations of cover-up in the RCMP investigation.

I have an RCMP briefing note which says the investigation was to be concluded in October. This being December 6, I would like to know what is the truth. Is the solicitor general being kept in the dark by his officials again? Is he sitting on the report? Or did the police get results they did not like?

[Royal Canadian Mounted Police, December 6th, 1999]

Mr. Speaker, day after day the solicitor general gives us shallow, unbelievable assurances that there is an internal investigation by RCMP top brass into allegations of cover-up and criminal misconduct in the Hong Kong visa scam, allegations levelled by Corporal Read.

I have in hand a letter to Commissioner Murray dated February 11, 1998 from the RCMP Public Complaints Commission that details Read's allegations. So we know that he has it. Unfortunately, however, the only action since then has been an attempt by Read's superiors to discredit him.

The issue is the infiltration of organized crime into Canadian society. The allegations include visas and citizenship for sale, including the compromise of Canada's security system.

Read's allegations do not stand alone. There are binders full of documents that cry out for an aggressive, independent investigation, not just into the original Hong Kong complaint, but the allegations of cover up in both the RCMP and CSIS.

The solicitor general must appoint a special prosecutor to investigate these allegations.