Joy Smith

[Criminal Code, October 24th, 2006]

Mr. Speaker, I want to thank the member for her comments. I really appreciated a new insight into this industry and the kinds of things she had mentioned. Could the member comment a little more on the provincial side of it because we need to be partners and leaders in terms of ensuring that this bill does get through?

I thank members opposite very much for supporting this bill. It is a very important one. Perhaps the member opposite could also give some more insight into which provinces have regulated payday loans and also comment on what could be done to get the provinces on board to regulate this kind of thing in their home provinces.

[Criminal Code, October 24th, 2006]

Mr. Speaker, I want to thank the hon. Minister of Justice for his very forward move in addressing the payday lending industry.

A very recent article in the local paper talked about this industry, about how it was growing and how it affects people. We know that payday lending happens not only with people who are very short of money but also with people who are supposedly very affluent but who find that keeping up with the mortgage and car payments is a real challenge.

My question for the minister is this. Can he tell the House how much interest is made on these loans and how frequently? I know he spoke to it briefly in his speech, but the rate of lending now is quite high for the payday loan industry. What kinds of people actually frequent this? Is it something that people do on a monthly basis or just once in a while to get the money they need to live on?

[Justice, October 24th, 2006]

Mr. Speaker, like many Canadians, I was horrified to hear that earlier this week a known sexual predator was exiled from the U.S. to serve his three year probation in Canada. As our laws are currently written, this man, Malcolm Watson, could not be charged in Canada for the same type of crime he committed in the U.S.

Could the justice minister inform the House about what measures the government is taking to protect our youth from adult sexual predators?

[Persons Day, October 18th, 2006]

Mr. Speaker, earlier today I had the honour of attending the 2006 Governor General Awards with the Minister of Canadian Heritage and Status of Women.

We were all inspired by the courageous Famous Five who challenged the existing status of women by creating legal history in women's rights by contesting the notion that legal definitions of persons excluded females.

We continue to honour the Famous Five today through the Governor General's Awards in commemoration of the Persons Case.

This year's award recipients are strong, dynamic and diverse women. They include: Joyce Hancock, Maureen Kempston Darkes, Doreen McKenzie-Sanders, Jan Reimer, Charlotte Thibault and Semma Shah.

I want to extend my heartfelt congratulations again to each of the winners and thank them for being Canadian leaders.

[Softwood Lumber Products Export Charge Act, 2006, October 17th, 2006]

Where?

[Softwood Lumber Products Export Charge Act, 2006, October 17th, 2006]

Mr. Speaker, I could not help but listen carefully to the member's speech which, with all due respect, was rather sanctimonious.

I have one question for the member.

Our government has just put in $81 million for literacy programs and I think it is passing strange and somewhat irresponsible to talk about cutting literacy programs. I would ask my colleague this: is $81 million not something to applaud? Are all the different programs that we have put in for literacy across this country not something to rejoice in and applaud?

[Status of Women, October 6th, 2006]

Mr. Speaker, during a recent Status of Women committee meeting, the member for Beaches—East York dismissed the important issue of human trafficking, referring to it as something that was really nice and sexy.

Canada was put on an international watch list for countries that dealt poorly with human trafficking. Within just months of being in power, Canada's new government adopted new measures that would help victims of human trafficking.

Could the Minister of Canadian Heritage and Status of Women please tell the House what other actions the government has taken to improve the lives of women?

[Petitions, October 4th, 2006]

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to present two petitions calling upon Parliament to re-open the issue of marriage in this Parliament and to repeal or amend the Marriage for Civil Purposes Act in order to promote and defend marriage as the lawful union of one man and one woman to the exclusion of all others. There are many signatures on these two petitions.

[Business of Supply, September 28th, 2006]

Mr. Speaker, as I stand here today I am rather shocked at the speech of the chair of the status of women committee, with its accusations and rhetoric. Clearly the chair herself has to know that Status of Women Canada continues to deliver results to Canadian women, with a budget of $23.4 million, $10.8 million of which is dedicated to women's programs. The program funding for women will not be and is not cut. To mislead the House in this way, to suggest that as soon as a Conservative government came in everything disintegrated, is an irresponsible move.

As vice-chair of the committee, I have to state in the House that I believe we need to be very respectful of all women, very respectful of making sure that we are accurate in what we say. Also, there is no mention in the House today of the 13 years of Liberal opportunity that was set out before the Liberal Party. The Liberals could have done all these things that today they are complaining about only a few months after the Conservative Party has become the government.

Clearly, those programs should have been implemented. Also, as a mother of six children and a teacher for 22 years, I know very well what it takes to develop small children in terms of their reading. It takes much more than the status of women committee. It takes people who are committed to the betterment of women and Canadians all across this nation.

I have a clear question for the chair of the status of women committee. All day I have heard criticisms of an organization called REAL Women. I do not know this organization and I have not spoken to people in this organization, but does the chair of the status of women committee not believe that every organization in our nation has an opportunity to voice its views and to be welcome to do that?

[Business of Supply, September 28th, 2006]

Mr. Speaker, I had trouble sifting through the comments of the member. The motion on the floor today has to do with the Status of Women and with the budget around it. We were talking also a little earlier about other issues around that.

Is the member aware that the program funding for women will not be cut? I heard him list different organizations. The administrative savings for the Status of Women, the $5 million costs savings, were necessary. Those savings can be used in different areas to directly impact on women's issues, like combating violence against women and girls and contributing to the economic well-being of women across our nation.

Would the member please answer the question and tell me whether he is aware that this program funding for women will not be cut?