John Rafferty

[Italian-Canadian Recognition and Restitution Act, May 28th, 2009]

Mr. Speaker, Bill C-302 is an act to recognize the injustice that was done to persons of Italian origin through their enemy alien designation and internment during the second world war and to provide for restitution and promote education on Italian Canadian history. This is the fourth time the bill has been introduced. It was previously introduced in three sessions of Parliament. I am very glad to see that it is back, and I am prepared, certainly, to support it.

I will give some historical background. In 1939, special wartime powers were given to the Canadian Minister of Justice to prevent the subversion of Canadian interests and loyalties. Italian Canadians were designated enemy aliens by the Government of Canada, and following Italy's declaration of war on June 10, 1940, our government ordered the internment of many of these so-called enemy aliens.

Between 600 and 700 Italian Canadians were reportedly interned as a result. Most were sent to Camp Petawawa on the Ottawa River.

Italian Canadians were required to register with the RCMP and report on a monthly basis. Travel restrictions were imposed. The teaching of the Italian language was declared illegal, as were various Italian organizations. Boycotts of Italian Canadian-owned and -run businesses started and many Italian Canadians lost their jobs.

In 1990, as my hon. friend who spoke just before me indicated, the National Congress of Italian Canadians briefed then Prime Minister Mulroney on these injustices and called for an apology and compensation. An apology was delivered and the money was announced but was not delivered.

Funding was announced again in June 2008 through Citizenship and Immigration Canada's community historical recognition program. I heard my hon. friend who spoke before me say that the Conservatives say the bill is shameful. I think that was his exact description. He was talking about money to come, but to date, the program's website lists no funds granted for projects related to the treatment of Italian Canadians during World War II.

I will talk briefly about Thunder Bay. Italian Canadians have a very long history in Thunder Bay. In fact, the Italian community was established in the late 19th century. The 1901 census shows 197 persons of Italian origin in Port Arthur and Fort William combined. By 1931, that community had grown to 2,500 people. Italian Canadians remain one of the largest ethnic communities in Thunder Bay, indeed one of the largest ethnic communities right across my riding of Thunder Bay—Rainy River.

I am a proud member of the Societa' Italiana Di Benevolenza Principe Di Piemonte. I am very happy to say, just to illustrate the longevity and how important Italian Canadians have been to Thunder Bay and to my riding, that this society started in 1909. This is the 100th anniversary of that society. It was started by a small group of Italian immigrants who wanted their heritage to stay alive in this new country that they had come to call their own.

The goal of their society was to promote and maintain good fellowship and the highest level of citizenship within members and the community.

A further goal of their society was the promotion and enhancement of Italian custom and culture in all its endeavours. This society and I am sure Italian societies right across this country have lived up to these ideals and continue to live up to these ideals and show how valuable their community is to Canada.

I would like to note that in September 1939, three days after German troops had invaded Poland, the Principe di Piemonte passed a motion pledging its loyalty to Canada. I have already outlined the historical background of what happened after that.

I would also like to mention the Canadian Italian Business and Professional Association of Thunder Bay that was incorporated in 1993. It promotes the recreational, cultural, social, artistic business and professional activities of Italian Canadians in Thunder Bay and the surrounding area. It encourages the participation of Italian Canadians in the economic and public affairs of that region and Canada.

What I am really trying to get at with this description is the importance and value that I am sure all of us in the House and right across this country see, not only in our immigrant population in general, but in particular today with our Italian immigrants. I believe that Canada would be a much poorer place without the contribution of Italian Canadians.

I would be willing to speak with the member later as to whether in fact the funds have flowed. I do not believe they have. As I said on the website, no funds are listed relating to projects associated with the treatment of Italian Canadians during World War II.

The Conservatives say that this bill is shameful. We can easily pass it with the co-operation of everyone in the House and, with the apology that has already taken place, we could ensure that the money that has been announced on numerous occasions is finally delivered.

[Committees of the House, May 26th, 2009]

Mr. Speaker, members on this side of the House believe in fairness. They believe that immigration is an important part of what has built this country and what continues to build this country. I prefer not to think that members of the government are meanspirited and nasty or think that perhaps there is a spy behind every curtain. I know that all hon. members in the House want an immigration policy in Canada, for Canada and for Canadians that is fair to all.

[Committees of the House, May 26th, 2009]

Mr. Speaker, absolutely. My experience has been that some cases, complicated or not, take a long period of time and some take a shorter period of time to get resolved. A good example in my riding is a short-order cook from mainland China who was here on a work permit and needed that permit extended. Quite frankly, the immigration department acted very quickly to make that happen. There was no shortfall or period of time when he was unable to work in the country. Otherwise, he would have been sent home. We have those kinds of cases, but we also have other cases that are very complicated.

I would like to say in response that our public service is fabulous. Canada's public service employees work hard and as well as they can within the rules, but sometimes the rules are not proper and need to be changed.

[Committees of the House, May 26th, 2009]

Mr. Speaker, thank you for the opportunity to speak today on this very important issue. It occurred to me as I listen to the debate that our country truly is built upon immigration. I think of my riding of Thunder Bay—Rainy River and immigration through the last century in particular, right up to and including the 1980s and 1990s. Like most ridings, Thunder Bay—Rainy River is a very diverse riding with many people having arrived as newcomers. Some are first, second or third generation.

Throughout our long history of immigration in Canada we have gone to extremes at various times. On occasion we have had a very open door policy on immigration. At times we have closed the door. This is a very different situation we are faced with today. The bottom line of what we are talking about is the devastating impact on families. We should be doing everything we possibly can to ensure that families stay together and raise their families here. Quite frankly, this is what Canadians have done for more than a century. We have opened our doors to people from around the world and it is only in our recent history we have said to people that they will have to leave the country in 30 to 60 days. For most of our history we have had an open door policy.

The communities in my riding would never have been built had it not been for Italian immigrants, Ukrainian immigrants and immigrants from other parts of eastern and western Europe. It behooves us to think very carefully about the impact of presuming that people are guilty when they arrive in our country, presuming that people are ne'er-do-wells, that people are here for fraudulent reasons. Granted, there may be an occasional case where that is true, but that is dealt with in the usual manner. What happens is that 99% of others are penalized. It is a question of fairness.

Imagine coming to this country looking for a better opportunity, looking to contribute to society and in the course of being here for six months, a year or two years, falling in love and starting to raise a family. Then the government says that one member of the family has to leave this country. In some cases a mother and children may get to stay in the country, but the husband has to leave. It is a very long and involved process to get back again.

I am not suggesting that the government should not remain vigilant against fraudulent immigration, but I am suggesting to the government that the instances are very, very few.

Canada has a strange policy in that it would deport one spouse. It is hard to believe that Canada will actually deport the person with the precarious status, even though that person is married to a Canadian. As my colleague from Trinity—Spadina said earlier today, the woman might be pregnant, or breastfeeding a baby or has other children. She could be deported, not her children. Sometimes it is the mom, sometimes it is the dad who is deported, but it breaks up the family.

In the last 10 to 15 years in this country everyone talks about the importance of the family and family values. Here is a situation where quite purposefully families are being split up.

It might take a year or two, sometimes a shorter period and sometimes a longer period, for the deported person to come back to Canada. For a couple that has just been married or has only been married for a year or two, to face separation for an extended period of time simply is not fair. Fairness is really what we are talking about today.

On top of that, the couple may have to pay thousands and thousands of dollars in legal fees and so on. If the person comes from a part of the world that is very expensive to travel to, there are those expenses as well. It may be tens of thousands of dollars before the situation is resolved. Is that fair?

Not only is it hard on the couple, but it is hard on the Canadian public when we consider the government resources that are being used, the tax dollars that are being spent to make all of this happen, when it would be quite simple to say, “Until things are resolved, we are not going to do anything. Just continue to stay with your family. Stay with your spouse. Stay with your children”.

In my riding offices, I do not deal with a lot of immigration issues. However, when I do, I would like to say that the government has been very cooperative in terms of helping me sort out these problems for constituents. When I say that, it astounds me even more that we are even having this discussion today, because it seems to me that we use a whole lot of government resources to sort out things that should not have to be sorted out in the first place.

I would like to conclude by suggesting that this immigration policy has a devastating effect on many Canadians and their loved ones. I am very pleased to have had the opportunity to express my dissatisfaction.

[Forestry Industry, May 14th, 2009]

Mr. Speaker, the government's neglect of the forestry sector has hurt communities, workers, pensioners and now small companies. Small companies like T&M Logging in Atikokan are owed, in some cases, hundreds of thousands of dollars by large bankrupt corporations like AbitibiBowater and Buchanan Forest Products. The proposed business credit availability program will be inaccessible to these smaller companies because they need overdraft limits of at least $400,000 to even apply.

Where is the small in small business? Bankruptcy laws protect large forestry companies, but what is the government doing to protect small businesses?

[Royal Canadian Mounted Police Superannuation Act, May 12th, 2009]

Madam Speaker, my colleague from Esquimalt—Juan de Fuca had a wide-ranging commentary. He mentioned at the end that there were a couple more topics he would like to discuss. One of them particularly caught my attention.

The Canadian Cancer Society has conducted a long campaign to fight contraband cigarettes. Cigarettes were one of the things he mentioned he would like to talk about. He may not have enough time, but could he comment on how we might attack the very real problem of contraband cigarettes?

[Royal Canadian Mounted Police Superannuation Act, May 12th, 2009]

Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank my colleague from Winnipeg Centre for his comments, particularly the history lesson we received. It was valuable for everyone in the House to hear and very important, but also his comments about collective bargaining, which other members have also discussed.

There is another point concerning the RCMP that has not been touched on and I would like to ask the member about, that being a pay raise that had been promised in 2008 by the current government and then was rolled back in the budget. The Conservatives say they have an agenda on crime, and in fact, have a police caucus that supports the RCMP. I would like the member for Winnipeg Centre to make some comments on that if he would.

[Cree-Naskapi (of Quebec) Act, May 7th, 2009]

Mr. Speaker, while I support the bill, there are a number of logistical housekeeping items that need to be addressed. Will the minister assure Canadians that this act will remain on his priority list until the needed corrections and amendments are made to the act?

[Canada-Peru Free Trade Agreement Implementation Act, April 20th, 2009]

Mr. Speaker, unfortunately, when we talk about parts of a free trade agreement where there is an opt out clause, it is pretty clear that governments are loath to trigger that.

If we look at our current free trade agreement with the United States and Mexico, I believe that with a six month warning we could get out of that free trade agreement. Quite frankly, people in my riding and people I deal with particularly in the forestry industry but in other industries as well put part of the blame for the situation we are in right now on NAFTA's shoulders. We have continually asked for something to happen with NAFTA, to renegotiate it. I was glad to read in the news the other day that the Liberals have decided that to renegotiate NAFTA is a good route to go. It seems people are loath to trigger that particular mechanism, so I am not confident that even though the mechanism exists in a free trade agreement, it will be used.

[Canada-Peru Free Trade Agreement Implementation Act, April 20th, 2009]

Mr. Speaker, the member's question is an important one that we need to consider with this free trade agreement.

One of the problems with labour in the Americas, as I did point out, is that unionized labour is a very small percentage of the population. In fact in Colombia it is about 5% and it is approximately that in Peru also.

When Canadian companies are there, I am hoping the conditions will improve for the workers who work for those Canadian companies, but that is a very small portion of the population. If we can raise the standard of living for the people who work for Canadian companies, that is wonderful, but let us not forget that there should be an advantage for all the other workers in those countries, where the poor continue to get poorer and poorer. While there is some advantage to unionized labour working for Canadian companies, there is not necessarily any trickle down effect or a role model that is followed by other companies in those countries.