Judy Sgro

[Criminal Code, October 17th, 2005]

Madam Speaker, we have already dealt with that issue and have made it very clear where the government stands. We are going to continue to work with all our partners in fighting crime, in how we are going to turn around and protect those who are most vulnerable in society, and in seeing what other things we can do to ensure that we are going after the culprits, not innocent children who are finding themselves in a given situation.

[Criminal Code, October 17th, 2005]

Madam Speaker, clearly these are issues that we all care very passionately about and want resolved. Bill C-49 is only one part of a multi-faceted approach that the government has taken to deal with the whole issue of crime and how much more closely we can work with international communities. Bill C-49 is one instrument. It is one tool. It is only one part of the fight to eradicate crime and protect the most vulnerable people in our society.

We are going to continue to move forward with a variety of pieces of legislation, working together to ensure the safety of people who live in Canada as well as the safety of people in other countries who clearly want to come to Canada. Some are led to believe that this is the land of luxury for everyone and they simply are brought here to be exploited. Bill C-49 will bring an end to that because we are going to be working closely with the international community on how we can make our laws that much stronger.

[Criminal Code, October 17th, 2005]

Madam Speaker, I am very pleased to join in the debate on Bill C-49 and to see that this is third reading. Hopefully, with the help of everyone in the House, the bill will be passed and quickly pushed into law.

I also would like to congratulate the minister for his hard work on something that is extremely important.

I will be sharing my time, Madam Speaker, with the member for Esquimalt—Juan de Fuca this evening.

The important part of Bill C-49 is the government's commitment to the protection of vulnerable persons and the ongoing strategy to combat human trafficking, something that all of us in the House deplore.

Currently, the Criminal Code does not specifically prohibit trafficking in persons, although a number of offences, including kidnapping, uttering threats and extortion do play a significant role in targeting this crime. Bill C-49 would strengthen this legislation by going beyond the focus on immigration and making trafficking in persons a criminal offence.

Victims are often women and children being forced into the sex industry, but at times also include men, women and children exploited through farm, domestic and other labour opportunities. In some countries, trafficked children may be forced into work as beggars and as child soldiers.

Trafficked persons are often duped into their own new professions, deceived with possible dreams in a rich land, with seemingly legitimate employment contracts or marriages abroad. These vulnerable people are too often fleeing poverty and poor living conditions, only to be enslaved in what they thought was going to be their country of opportunity on their arrival in Canada.

Upon arriving at their destination, many of these individuals are put to work, subject to debt bondage which they can never pay back because it increases on a weekly basis. They can spend years and years trying to repay their bondage to be free. Victims of trafficking are often subjected to physical, sexual and emotional abuse.

Although some are universally recognized as victims, for example children who are exploited through the sex trade, others are often perceived as illegal migrants or criminals, people who should be persecuted and prosecuted. Women trafficked in the sex trade are sometimes seen as simply violating immigration or criminal laws relating to prostitution, rather than looking at the seriousness of the big picture.

Because of these perceptions and because of the threats from traffickers, many victims are reluctant to turn to the police for protection. Those of us who come from large urban centres frequently hear that as a concern that they have. The social stigma of prostitution is also a factor. Women trafficked internationally who are returned to their home countries may be ostracized within their communities and their families, again becoming a victim.

We need to ensure in this legislation that we provide strong criminal and witness protection measures backed by the necessary resources in order to ensure effective prosecutions and the real deterrent against trafficking.

We also need accurate statistics concerning the scope of trafficking at home and abroad, a difficult thing at times to achieve.

Although there are no clear statistics, the Royal Canadian Mounted Police estimate that 600 foreign women and girls are coerced into the sex trade in Canada every year with a promise of a better life. This number would probably rise to approximately 800 if it were to include those trafficked into Canada for other kinds of forced labour. Estimates also indicate that approximately 1,500 to 2, 200 people are trafficked from Canada into the United States every year.

Bill C-49 promises a series of criminal law reforms which will enable us to better address human trafficking. Specifically, it would create the three new indictable Criminal Code offences, providing our law enforcement officials with additional tools to address the full range of behaviour often associated with this terrible crime.

Human trafficking involves the recruitment, transportation, concealing and harbouring of a person in order to exploit the person. The main offence proposed by Bill C-49 would target exactly this behaviour and specifically prohibit it.

This offence would carry a strong penalty, indeed, the strongest penalty our criminal law provides: life imprisonment where the offence involves kidnapping, aggravated assault, aggravated sexual assault or the death of the victim. In all other cases, the penalty would be 14 years' imprisonment. This sends a very strong message that such conduct will not be tolerated in Canada and, in my opinion, rightfully acknowledges the terrible impact this activity has on its victims, their families and society in general.

Bill C-49 also proposes to define exploitation as central to the main offence. This is very important, because we know that the crime of human trafficking is always about exploitation of the victims. Bill C-49, in my opinion, properly defines the most reprehensible aspect of this crime. Whether victims are exploited for forced labour, for sexual services or for human organs or tissue, traffickers exploit the lives and the souls of their victims for profit.

And profit they do. By all accounts, human trafficking is big business, generating an estimated $10 billion annually for its perpetrators. That is why Bill C-49 also proposes to create another offence that would target those who would profit from the exploitation of others. Specifically, it would prohibit anyone from receiving a financial or material benefit knowing that it results from the trafficking of persons. This offence is punishable by up to 10 years' imprisonment.

I support this approach because it specifically addresses one of the primary factors fuelling the demand for this type of labour, that is, the ability to make huge profits from the buying, selling and reselling of human beings. Moreover, it provides law enforcement with an improved ability to get at those who would economically benefit from this crime, those who may not actually engage in the physical act of trafficking in persons but who clearly benefit.

Finally, Bill C-49's proposed third offence would prohibit the withholding or destroying of travel or identity documents in order to commit or facilitate the trafficking of persons. This offence would be punishable by a maximum of five years' imprisonment.

Bill C-49 will help to ensure the protection of society's most vulnerable people. I want to say thanks to all members of the House for supporting it. I again congratulate the minister and the government for moving it forward.

[Health, October 4th, 2005]

Mr. Speaker, Toronto's public health officials are investigating the deaths of four people from a respiratory illness at a seniors residence.

Could the Minister of State for Public Health tell the House if the Public Health Agency of Canada is assisting the Ontario officials in finding an answer to this question?

[Business of Supply, May 31st, 2005]

Mr. Chair, when we talk about caregivers, many of us know people across the country, many of our own constituents, who are dealing with elderly parents. Usually women have to leave their post of employment in order to take care of an elderly mother or father or someone who is seriously sick in the family.

I know governments have talked for a long time about that very issue. I recognized that we are into a new process in trying to meet these needs. Does the minister have anything to offer today as he continues his very important work on those issues?

[Business of Supply, May 31st, 2005]

Mr. Chair, I am pleased to have the opportunity tonight to speak in this very important debate on the main estimates for Human Resources and Social Development.

To begin my remarks this evening, I would like to touch on our recent budget, which includes many initiatives for Canada's seniors. This budget makes significant investments in seniors programs from health care to income security, from retirement savings to assistance for their care givers. Our constant goal is to enhance the quality of life for all seniors and we must always remember that this country was built by the seniors we have today.

The guaranteed income supplement provides low income seniors with a benefit that ensures a basic level of income throughout their retirement years.

In 2004, our government, under the great leadership of our Prime Minister and a great Minister of State for Families and Caregivers, made a commitment, along with the rest of our colleagues, to increase the guaranteed income supplement by $1.5 billion over the next five years. That was clearly illustrated in platforms and in items that we have distributed.

However budget 2005 goes above and beyond that commitment. We will increase the guaranteed income supplement benefits for low income seniors, not by $1.5 billion, but by $2.7 billion over two years. By 2007 the maximum guaranteed income supplement will be increased by more than $400 per year for a single senior and by almost $700 for a couple.

Seniors are and want to remain active members of our society. The budget increases support for the hugely successful New Horizons program which promotes voluntary sector activity and supports our seniors. Annual funding will increase to $25 million by 2007 and 2008. This a very popular program among many Canadians and many seniors.

The budget provides $13 million over five years to establish a new national senior secretariat so that we can focus as a government on the many needs of our seniors today.

Seniors have concerns about a range of issues. They include pensions, the health care system, pharmacare, housing and the difficulties associated with living on a fixed income. We hear about it every day.

Our government is committed to upholding the retirement system that provides Canadians with the opportunity to live with dignity and security and the other social programs which define our country and make Canada the best place to live at all stages of a person's life.

The government's strong fiscal management, economic growth and the successful reform of the Canada pension plan have allowed us to safeguard the quality of life for Canada's seniors.

Back in 1997, this government had to reconstruct the Canada pension plan in order to meet the increased demands of an aging population and to ensure its sustainability. It was a difficult move but an important decision to make.

Since 1999, the federal government has invested more than $35 billion to support the renewal of our health care system, research and other health promotion programs. Our government has taken a leadership role to ensure that our health care system remains high quality and meets the needs of our aging population.

Canada's seniors need to know that there is a place for them in our society, that they are of value to us and that they will continue to play a vital role in the community. We will continue a role of mutual respect and understanding. Our valued seniors deserve to benefit from a retirement income system that ensures their ability to live in dignity. Our 2005 budget demonstrates that commitment to our seniors.

Members present in the chamber this evening, such as myself and others, have many constituents who are either on the verge of entering their senior years or planning for them.

I would like to ask the Minister of State for Families and Caregivers the following question: How best can the government work with the other partners in society to meet the changing needs and priorities of seniors in the coming years and to ensure that the actions we take now will endure for the many years ahead?

[Nursing, May 19th, 2005]

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to rise today to inform the House that last week, May 9 to 15, 2005, was National Nursing Week. This year's theme is “Nursing: Patients first. Safety always”.

I would like to commend our nurses' dedication to deliver first class health care to Canadian families, often under very difficult circumstances. National Nursing Week provides us with a wonderful opportunity to celebrate the immense contribution that nurses, especially our front line workers, make to our communities.

I want to particularly mention the Humber River Regional Hospital in my own riding of York West and all the valued and hard-working nurses who provide the highest quality care.

I am honoured to offer my thanks to everyone who has chosen nursing as a career. Their tireless efforts make a positive impact on the lives of Canadians.

[Privilege, May 10th, 2005]

Mr. Speaker, the apology and retraction by Mr. Singh continues: “I am aware and consent to the fact that this apology and retraction may be released to the media for publication. I ask that my privacy and that of my family be respected. I will not be making any further comments to the media regarding this matter”. It is signed before a witness by Harjit Singh.

Mr. Speaker, the allegations and the personal attacks made against my integrity and my reputation as an individual were very difficult for my family and I, as they would be for anyone in the House. I am grateful to everyone who supported me during these difficult times. I very much appreciate the support of my constituents in my riding of York West and my colleagues in the House of Commons.

This situation should serve as a reminder to all that before we pass judgment on the alleged conduct of individuals, we should first have all the facts. Reputations should not be tarnished by unsubstantiated allegations and innuendo solely for partisan politics.

All of us as hon. members in the House should use caution to ensure that we do not abuse the immunity that the House provides. This honourable institution should never be used to propagate smear campaigns and personal attacks against anyone regardless of what side of the House one is on.

I also wish to report to the House that after an extensive investigation by the Ethics Commissioner, he has concluded that I acted appropriately in the situation involving Ms. Balaican. The Ethics Commissioner's report fully supports what I have said from the very beginning, which is that I acted appropriately and did not breach any ethical guidelines, that I had never met with Ms. Balaican, nor was I ever aware that she had volunteered on my campaign.

He stated that my decision to grant the minister's permit was based on reasons entirely consistent with the criteria that I had been using as a minister in determining all other requests seeking my intervention.

Once again, I would like to take the opportunity to thank the many people across Canada who provided me with support and well wishes. Most important, I want to thank our Prime Minister, one, for accepting my decision to step down, and two, for his unwavering support both politically and personally.

Mr. Speaker, I respectfully ask for unanimous consent to table the public retraction and apologies from Singh and the other defendant, as well as the report from Dr. Bernard Shapiro, our Ethics Commissioner.

I thank you, Mr. Speaker, and all of my colleagues.

[Privilege, May 10th, 2005]

Mr. Speaker, I rise today on a question of personal privilege. Members will recall that on January 14, 2005, I resigned as Minister of Citizenship and Immigration after serious allegations were made against me relating to Harjit Singh and his immigration situation.

At the time these allegations were made, I had decided to step down as Minister of Citizenship and Immigration in order to clear my name. On January 31, 2005, I commenced legal action against Harjit Singh and others as a result of false and outrageous statements made against me.

Today I am pleased to say that all legal proceedings between Harjit Singh and I and others have been settled. As part of the settlement, I received a full and complete retraction from Harjit Singh and public apologies from all of the defendants.

I now wish to read Harjit Singh's public apology and retraction into the record. It states:

“I, Harjit Singh, wish to provide a full and complete apology and retraction to Judy Sgro for statements made by me or attributed to me by the media in connection with my immigration situation. I now admit that I did not have a meeting with Judy Sgro. Further, at no time did Judy Sgro request any campaign assistance from me, nor did she help me with my immigration problem.

I am providing this apology and retraction voluntarily and of my own free will, having been provided with independent legal advice. I would like to say that I sincerely regret any statements that may in any way have tarnished Judy Sgro's privileges as a Member of the House of Commons, and further sincerely regret any embarrassment or pain caused to Judy Sgro by my statements, which were completely false”.

[Gasoline Prices, April 20th, 2005]

Mr. Speaker, I rise on a point of order. I would like to be recorded as in opposition to that motion.