John Duncan

[Nisga'A Final Agreement Act, October 27th, 1999]

Mr. Speaker, I have a point of clarification. The time before which I would have to speak and still get 20 minutes was 3.53 p.m. We are past that time. I have had a challenge posed to me by the member from Kamloops. I fully would like to respond to his questions. Could I ask the House if I could speak for more than 10 minutes and no longer than 20 minutes?

[Nisga'A Final Agreement Act, October 27th, 1999]

Mr. Speaker, I listened attentively to the speech of the hon. member for Kamloops, Thompson and Highland Valleys. There are obviously many areas where we disagree. I am presumably the next one to speak and I think I will have trouble delivering everything in the time allotted, so I will ask the hon. member some questions.

The hon. member is correct in stating that the Indian Act is gone, but one part remains, and that is the part that deals with who is an Indian, which is the very worst part of the Indian Act.

There are many other concerns I would like to get to, one of which is the fact that we are here to represent a very educated public in British Columbia, a public which is more educated on this issue than those in any other part of Canada. Has the member done any polling in his riding? We have.

[Nisga'A Final Agreement Act, October 27th, 1999]

Mr. Speaker, I rise on a point of order. I understand the member for Nanaimo—Cowichan was not on the second part of 20 minutes. Mr. Speaker, you may want to ask him for clarification.

[Petitions, October 27th, 1999]

Mr. Speaker, I have a petition signed by over 800 individuals from my riding of Vancouver Island North.

The petitioners are asking parliament to enact immediate changes to Canada's immigrations laws governing refugees to allow for the deportation of obvious and blatant illegal immigrants to Canada.

I have a second petition signed by 163 individuals from my riding of Vancouver Island North.

The petitioners are asking parliament to do exactly the same thing as the previous petition regarding the deportation of obvious and blatant illegal immigrants to Canada.

[Aboriginal Affairs, October 22nd, 1999]

Mr. Speaker, it would be good to hear from the fisheries minister.

The Marshall decision establishes a race-based commercial fishery on the east coast. History Professor Patterson was one of the central experts cited in that case. He thinks the ruling was flawed. He said:

Mr. Binnie relies extensively on my testimony in order to support that position. But I think what he has quoted from my testimony is very, very incomplete.

Why will the government not ask the supreme court to stay the Marshall decision, and clarify it?

[Youth Criminal Justice Act, October 21st, 1999]

Mr. Speaker, that was an excellent speech in support of the member's private member's bill in the House of Commons.

We have to recognize the difference between punishment and rehabilitation. When one wants to talk about rehabilitation, which is the most important part of the project when talking about young people, one wants to ensure that people are not left out of the ability to be counselled in the right way and in the right place and to have those resources available.

I have family involved in the rehabilitation of people in the corrections system. It is certainly my opinion that the way the system works is not adequate. The courts or other institutions dealing with young people do not have the option of sending those people for proper rehabilitation because they are not a part of the age group to which the Young Offenders Act applies.

I would like the member to address that point and to address the fact that it does not matter what we say or do in this place there is an obvious shortage of resources available when we are talking about correcting something that has gone wrong. We really need something for many of our children that starts long before that. If the hon. member who spoke would like to address those issues I would appreciate it.

[Petitions, October 20th, 1999]

Mr. Speaker, I have a petition signed by 70 individuals from my riding of Vancouver Island North.

The petitioners are asking parliament to refrain from enacting legislation which would remove the name of God from the Canadian constitution and the charter of rights.

[Committees Of The House, June 11th, 1999]

Mr. Speaker, I rise on a point of order. If the motion were to include a statement that we are approving a sum not to exceed $117,700 that would be agreeable.

[Petitions, June 11th, 1999]

Mr. Speaker, on behalf of constituents from the riding of Esquimalt—Juan de Fuca I present a petition on behalf of 3,500 Victoria area residents who want God left in in the preamble of our constitution.

The petitioners from Esquimalt—Juan de Fuca humbly petition parliament to oppose any amendments to the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms or any other legislation which will provide for the exclusion of reference to the supremacy of God in our constitution and laws.

These 3,500 signatures were collected readily on June 6 and 7.

[Royal Canadian Mounted Police, June 11th, 1999]

Mr. Speaker, of the $10 million that was given to the RCMP, this government clawed back $8.5 million.

The federally run RCMP DNA testing lab in British Columbia has a six month backlog of investigations, for some of the most serious crimes committed in the province, due to lack of funding. DNA testing is the most effective, contemporary crime fighting tool that we have.

Why is the government spending millions on bogus grants and handouts rather than fully funding DNA testing?