Kevin Lamoureux

[Safe Streets and Communities Act, September 27th, 2011]

Mr. Speaker, I have a quick question for the minister.

My understanding is that if we compare a child predator, who is trying to get a child to do something such as watch pornographic movies, to someone who gets caught growing six marijuana plants, there is a stricter penalty or consequence for the individual who is growing the marijuana. Is that not correct? If so, would he agree that something is wrong there?

[Safe Streets and Communities Act, September 27th, 2011]

Mr. Speaker, I will begin by citing a couple of quotes. The first quote comes from the Minister of Citizenship, Immigration and Multiculturalism on May 27, 1998, when he stated:

I begin by condemning this government for allowing itself to trample on democracy and democratic deliberation....

He was referring to time allocation, among other things.

This quote on June 10, 2003 comes from the member for Edmonton Southwest, who said:

The purpose of the institution of Parliament is supposed to be a deliberative assembly. When we shut down debate, we eliminate the whole purpose for the institution in the first place.

What is the government doing here? It has taken a bunch of bills and put them into one, which we call Bill C-10, and now it is putting a time limitation that prevents members of Parliament from being able to talk on each and every, what should be, separate bills. What would those members have said back then about government action?

I would suggest that what is being forced upon the opposition today is most unfair and not very well principled when it comes to the democratic principles of the House of Commons.

[Safe Streets and Communities Act, September 27th, 2011]

Mr. Speaker, I am very sensitive to many of the comments made by New Democratic members on this bill. However, in the September 21 issue of the Winnipeg Sun, I was quite surprised to read the NDP government's position on this bill. Gord Mackintosh, whom I have known personally for a number of years, stated that they strongly urge all parties in Ottawa to support this crime bill and to support it expeditiously. In fact, Mr. Mackintosh indicated that the bill does not go far enough.

Has the NDP government caucus in Manitoba had any consultation with the member's caucus as to what its position actually is on Bill C-10? Could her party share with the House what those costs might be, for example, in the province of Manitoba?

[Safe Streets and Communities Act, September 27th, 2011]

Mr. Speaker, the problem with this particular bill is that the government has made a decision in its wisdom to say that it wants this, this and this. Those are all pieces that should have been separate pieces of legislation so that when the government brings forward individual pieces of legislation there is more legitimacy to the debate on the issue and the law that it is attempting to change.

There are many things that we could be doing in terms of amendments to the refugee and immigration laws.

Would the Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Citizenship and Immigration recognize that there is so much more that could have been done had this been a stand-alone bill, which would have enabled all members to have a better engagement on what is a critically important issue across this country? In fact, there needs to be dialogue with provinces? Some provinces have actually made significant advancements on protecting the workers. Would the hon. member not agree with that?

[Safe Streets and Communities Act, September 27th, 2011]

Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the comments that the member has put on the record. I especially liked the comments put on the record by the member for Mount Royal in terms of why it is that Bill C-10 is so fundamentally flawed, why it is that we need the government to take more of an aggressive approach in dealing with some of the causes of these crimes and why we are not doing enough to prevent crimes from occurring in the first place.

I am sure the member for Vancouver Centre would be aware that the Government of Manitoba has taken the position that the bill does not gone far enough. It surprised me, I must say, when it took that position.

Does the member believe that the additional responsibilities that would be given and the financial obligations from the provinces as a result of this legislation are totally unfair? Is he aware of any sort of consultation that has been taking place between the provinces and Ottawa with regard to these costs?

[Libya, September 26th, 2011]

Mr. Speaker, I want to do a bit of a follow-up on that question.

I think countries around the world and Canadians themselves recognize that Canada has played a critical role in the freedom that many Libyans have today as a result of our direct involvement. Ultimately, we want to do more than just offer our Canadian Forces. We also want to be able to provide humanitarian support and so forth.

I have a concern and I am a bit surprised in terms of the NDP positioning on it. Does she not believe that there is some danger of pulling out our forces when there could be further human tragedies as a direct result? Our forces have put a phenomenal effort into doing such a wonderful job on behalf of our country. Does she not see that there is an element of danger that we would be putting people into if, in fact, we were to follow the amendment that is being suggested by the NDP?

[Libya, September 26th, 2011]

Mr. Speaker, it is a shame that the Liberal Party was not able to move the subamendment because I have often heard members on the government side talk about the compassionate side and the importance of humanitarian support. The amendment that was talked about by the member for Mount Royal highlighted the aspect that Canada does have a stronger role in that area to play.

Because of the amendment and the position the NDP took on it, we were not allowed to bring forward the subamendment.

At this time, I will take the opportunity to acknowledge the wonderful efforts of the Canadian Forces and the work that it has done.

Does the member or the government envision any circumstances wherein the UN or NATO might become disengaged? What role does he see NATO and the UN having in terms of a disengagement with Libya?

[Libya, September 26th, 2011]

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to hear the comments from the Bloc representative in regard to its position on the whole Libya issue. There is no doubt that the Liberal Party and others inside this chamber have seen the value in terms of providing freedom for the people of Libya.

One of the questions that needs to be answered, and I look to the government or the Bloc representative, is this. Under what kind of circumstances would the member envision this engagement in terms of the role that the UN or NATO would play in regard to taking a position of when Canada should withdraw from Libya? To what degree does the Bloc see NATO and the UN providing guidance on that issue?

[Petitions, September 26th, 2011]

Mr. Speaker, as we all know, Canadian wheat farmers in the Prairies want to retain the Canadian Wheat Board. A vast majority have clearly indicated that in a plebiscite.

This petition is calling for the government to be respectful of what the Canadian prairie farmers really want. We appeal to the minister reponsible for the wheat board to do the honourable thing and listen to what those prairie farmers are saying and allow the Canadian Wheat Board to continue on.

It is with pleasure that I table this petition here today.

[Preventing Human Smugglers from Abusing Canada's Immigration System Act, September 23rd, 2011]

Mr. Speaker, I was a little surprised in terms of the Conservative member's question. I was under the understanding, based on what the Minister of Citizenship, Immigration and Multiculturalism said, that the primary reason for this particular bill is to target the profiteers, the smugglers.

Having said that, I ask the member if, in his opinion, he believes that Bill C-4 would have more of an impact on the profiteers and smugglers, or would he agree with the Liberal Party in saying that the real impact would be in making victims of the refugees.