Jim Maloway

[Electronic Commerce Protection Act, May 7th, 2009]

Madam Speaker, Internet security has been an emerging business, growing very rapidly over the last number of years now because of issues such as this.

Ten years ago the Manitoba government had security people earning $100,000 a year. We could not keep them because the banks were hiring them at more than double the price. This has been the effect of not having legislation in place all these years, allowing these spammers to be running free in our market.

The question really comes back to how committed the Conservative government is to this, beyond getting a nice press release out and some good coverage, like they did on the do-not-call legislation last year, but then doing very little enforcement?

It is incumbent upon us to tighten the noose around the government as much as we can to make certain that it has no option to get out of enforcing a very strong act.

[Electronic Commerce Protection Act, May 7th, 2009]

Madam Speaker, I want to follow up on the question by the member of the Liberal Party.

In around 2000 I had the good fortune in Manitoba to be the coordinator to bring in the electronic commerce act, which was the most comprehensive of its kind in Canada at the time. We put in a consumer provision for residents to be reimbursed by credit card companies if they purchased a product or service online and they did not receive it. At the time, there were only two or three states in the United States that had such a provision.

I am not sure whether it would be under this bill, but I wonder whether consumer legislation like that could be added to this bill.

[Electronic Commerce Protection Act, May 7th, 2009]

Madam Speaker, I would like to commend the member for a very good presentation. I do have some concerns. They are not necessarily regarding the legislation, because we in our party do support the legislation. We think that it should have been brought in long ago because we are behind the curve in this area.

What we have here is a pro-business government. It is not really known for being a leader in consumer-type legislation. The issue becomes whether one trusts the government. We could have the fanciest, most comprehensive legislation in the world, but if the enforcement is not there, we really have not accomplished much.

I would like to know whether the member and his party have any ideas on how we can not only make the best legislation possible here in the House but also limit the possible loopholes the government might have for not giving it the full enforcement that it deserves.

[Electronic Commerce Protection Act, May 7th, 2009]

Mr. Speaker, I want to thank the member for an excellent presentation. I do recall hearing a lot from him over the last few years on consumer issues, particularly the high price of gasoline, when he has actually been ahead of his party on consumer issues. I really appreciate him doing that. He indicated he introduced the first bill in 2003 and certainly had his battles with his own government at the time because he could not get it to move. But I applaud him for sticking with his principles and sticking to the issues by taking positions that were not always consistent with his government at the time.

He indicated the way the bill is structured and set up by the government. He also talked about the poor resources that Industry Canada may have and the problems it has with coordination. Does he have any suggestions for amendments that would make this a much tougher, easier and forceful bill?

[Renewable Energy, May 6th, 2009]

Madam Speaker, the government seems to be following the old U.S. policies.

Could the member tell the government that George Bush is no longer in power? We should forget arguing about the past and move forward on a good idea and a good resolution from the member.

[Seal Hunt, May 5th, 2009]

Mr. Chair, I have listened to the debate for quite a while and it seems to me that all of the parties here in the House have to work together for a common purpose and not fight among ourselves.

I think back to a previous minority government in Manitoba, when Gary Filmon was the premier. He worked with Gary Doer, who was the opposition leader at the time, and Sharon Carstairs, who is now in the Senate, and they dealt with some very important issues of the day: the Meech Lake accord, the Charlottetown accord, and the whole issue of banning smoking was dealt with through an all-party committee. We left acrimony out of it and we worked together for a common cause.

I think that is what we should be doing here. We have to take the fight back to the European Union. One of the members of the Liberal Party mentioned earlier that the Germans have exposure here, allowing a hunt. I can see an ad running in Europe, sponsored by a Canadian coalition, pointing out those inconsistencies to kill this before it goes much further. We should get together on this issue.

[Criminal Code, May 5th, 2009]

Mr. Speaker, Bill C-26 is a very good bill and a bill that should be supported. However, the government should be concentrating on things that work rather than just public relations.

I want to point out that the former Filmon government in Manitoba back in the nineties brought in several measures that it thought were good at the time, such as the restitution measures and the denial of a driver's licence to young offenders. However, those measures did not work as auto theft rates at that time kept going up. It was not until the Manitoba government, two years ago, brought in a mandatory immobilizer program in cars, that auto theft rates dropped, which indicates that we are getting results.

We had a federal Liberal government in power for 15 years and all it had to do was mandate automatic immobilizer installation in the factory. The Insurance Bureau of Canada priced it out at around $30. The Liberals never did that. Had they--

[Criminal Code, May 5th, 2009]

Mr. Speaker, as I indicated, Winnipeg went from the car theft capital of Canada, to a day last month where absolutely no cars were stolen. We did that through an immobilizer program and a gang suppression unit.

Now, if 15 years ago the previous federal government had required car manufacturers to install immobilizers in their cars for a $30 fee, which is what it would have cost, this problem would have been taken care of. This was under the previous Liberal government. It takes about 13 years to get the old cars off the road.

We have managed to do it in only two years in Manitoba, by enforcing the immobilizer program and getting them into cars, and by giving people an insurance reduction. We have proven it will work.

If the government would simply require that all new cars being sold in Canada have immobilizers, this problem would solve itself. I understand that last year the government in fact did that; it has required that all new cars have immobilizers.

Does the member have any comments about what the previous Liberal government failed to do over the last 13 years?

[Criminal Code, May 5th, 2009]

Mr. Speaker, I had to respond when I heard the member ask the question about the bait car program because in Manitoba, I think we did look at that program and decided that was not the way to go.

I can tell the member from New Brunswick what we did in Manitoba that has proven to be very successful. We were the car theft capital of Canada for a few years until three or four years ago when we made the decision to mandate immobilizer use through our public insurance corporation. We had a voluntary program for a couple of years and very few people were taking us up on it. Two years ago we finally made it mandatory for people to install them. We gave it to them for free and we gave an insurance credit for them to do it.

We had one day last month when there were zero car thefts in Manitoba. We have gone from the highest in the country for a number of years to zero one day last month. I think the member should look at the Manitoba program and maybe look for some answers there.

[Starred Questions, May 5th, 2009]

Concerning the rehabilitation of the Disraeli bridges in the riding of Elmwood—Transcona in Winnipeg, which are expected to be closed for 16 months, did the government have any communications or requests for assistance from the Mayor of Winnipeg to shorten the length of that closure or to construct an additional span which when finished would allow for no closure at all and, if so, what are the details of these communications?