Kevin Sorenson

[Corrections and Conditional Release Act, December 3rd, 2002]

Mr. Speaker, the government has a lot of work in progress but the Canadian public still has yet to see evidence or fruits of that labour.

The failure of the former solicitor general to implement, as promised, the changes to the CCRA effectively dismisses the work of the subcommittee and, in particular, puts Canadians at risk to those who would reoffend on statutory release.

When will the Solicitor General make good on his predecessor's promise? When will the Corrections and Conditional Release Act be amended as recommended?

[Corrections and Conditional Release Act, December 3rd, 2002]

Mr. Speaker, in October 2000, the former solicitor general issued a formal response to the justice subcommittee report entitled “A Work in Progress: the Corrections and Conditional Release Act”.

Contained within the solicitor general's response was a clear statement that the government intended to take actions on 46 of the committee's 53 recommendations. We know that the government has failed and failed miserably to implement those recommendations.

Why has the government refused to take action on the 46 recommendations?

[Kyoto Protocol, December 3rd, 2002]

Mr. Speaker, I thank the member for his interesting perspective. I find it more odd that he would use leadership as his thesis for the speech when his party is the one party that is lacking leadership above all else. The Kyoto protocol will be anything but leadership.

Leadership taking the forces, walking and having someone follow is not necessarily positive leadership. What we need is leadership that can take a look at and recognize the Kyoto protocol for what it is. It is dangerous for Canada, Alberta, and to the economy.

If Canada were to sign the Kyoto protocol we would have the distinction of being one of the countries that would perhaps, more than any other country, have to significantly reduce its emissions. Countries in the developing world would not have to reduce their emissions. They have not signed the protocol. They are not included in it and yet out of the six billion individuals on the planet, five billion are from the developing world.

The United States has shown leadership. It has looked at the impact that it would have on its economy and on the country and it has said it needs a different type of plan to reduce CO

2

. Australia recognized that it was able to negotiate and it will not sign the Kyoto protocol.

Many of the western European countries would not be affected because they have already reduced their amounts to levels that would not force them into making a plan that would hinder and hurt their economies to the degree that Canada would be hurt.

I must note that Europe uses nuclear energy and it is a leader in that area. Is that the type of leadership that this member would like to see Canada move toward, more nuclear powered energy? Japan obviously has not.

Given that the Canadian Manufacturers' Association, the Chamber of Commerce, and all those dealing specifically with the economy of the country, have warned us and told us of the hurt to the economy that we would see with the ratification of the Kyoto protocol, what kind of leadership is it from a country that would walk its economy into that type of situation?

[Kyoto Protocol, December 3rd, 2002]

Mr. Speaker, I have sat here and listened to the last two speakers from the New Democratic Party give their party policy and basically their canned speech over and over again.

The member for Windsor--St. Clair spent most of his time smearing the Canadian Alliance Party for being opposed to the Kyoto accord. Most of his speech smeared Alberta and most of western Canada. Of course the grand daddy of them all, he spent most of his time smearing the United States of America.

The member who just spoke pulled out the policy book on health. She said that Kyoto deals with the greatest threat to the health of Canadians, recognizing that CO

2

emissions are putting every life into jeopardy.

The concern of the Canadian Alliance, Alberta and many others is that if the Kyoto protocol is signed, Canada will have the distinction of being the only country in the world, the only country on the planet, that will have to significantly, perhaps more significantly than any other country signing on, lower its CO

2

emissions. Developing countries are exempt, countries with populations of five billion to six billion. The United States is exempt.

If the economy is as devastated as what projections show, where will the member find the resources to put into health care?

[Kyoto Protocol, December 3rd, 2002]

Mr. Speaker, the member for Stoney Creek talked about some of the concerns. Even in answering that question, he referred to the fact that he did not want to see one part of the country torn apart from another part or put at a disadvantage. He mentioned in his discourse that he had concerns for some parts of the country and he said that we must “function as a nation”.

We are dealing with one of the largest agreements that has come before the House in perhaps 12 years. The Kyoto protocol will be significant to the oil and gas industry. It will hurt the oil and gas industry. It is going to devastate sectors and regions of the country more than other regions. Why would the government proceed without other levels of government buying into the plan?

Why would the federal government unilaterally move ahead on an agreement that does not have the provincial governments on board? British Columbia, Alberta and Saskatchewan have said it is going to cause huge economic disasters in certain regions of the country.

Why would the member buy into an accord when just a week ago the National Post reported that the member for Stoney Creek, the head of the steel caucus, said that the protocol was ruinous but added, “I believe the government when it said no one section will be made uncompetitive”. What has made him change his mind?

[Petitions, December 2nd, 2002]

Mr. Speaker, I rise on a point of order. I wonder if there would be unanimous consent to revert to the introduction of private members' bills?

[Queen's Jubilee Medal, December 2nd, 2002]

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to once again commend 20 well-deserving residents of Crowfoot, Alberta whom I had the distinct honour of presenting with the Queen's Golden Jubilee Medal this past Friday.

Each of these Canadian citizens have been “integral members of our community”. They have displayed a willingness to above and beyond the call of duty. They have been humble, giving and caring of every person who crosses their path and they have always been willing to lend a hand. They have made this country a better place to live.

I ask the members of the House to join me in congratulating Crowfoot's Golden Jubilee recipients: Dolores Aseltine, George Biggs, Jack Chapman, William Duncan, David Duzuba, Muriel Fankhanel, James Gillespie, Harry Gordon, George Geer, Rose Jardine, Mildred Luz, the late Thomas Machell, Walter McNary, Jack Mitchell, Morris Schultz, Auguste Simard, Gordon Taylor, Wanda Tkach, Joyce Webster and Chester Zajic.

I congratulate them all and thank them.

[Business of the House, November 28th, 2002]

That's not a partridge. That's a turkey.

[Terrorism, November 27th, 2002]

Mr. Speaker, I rise today in response to the Solicitor General's statement regarding the listing of a further six entities pursuant to the Criminal Code.

It is somewhat of an understatement to say that the Solicitor General's claim that the government “moved quickly to implement the anti-terrorist plan” is a misnomer.

Bill C-36 received royal assent on December 18, 2001, yet it took the Solicitor General seven months to bring forward the first group of entities to be listed as illegal terrorist organizations. It took seven months for the government to determine that al-Qaeda was in fact a terrorist organization. It has now taken an additional four months for the government to finally determine and list Hamas as a terrorist organization, a fact that has long been recognized by the United Nations as well as many other countries.

Hamas, the Tamil Tigers and Hezbollah are among the over 200 organizations identified by the United Nations as terrorists. In July when the first seven entities were listed we, as well as many others, publicly criticized the government for failing to list Hezbollah. There have been ample justification and evidence, such as the 1983 truck bombing of a United States marine barracks in Beirut and the 1994 bombing of the Israeli cultural centre in Buenos Aires, proving that not only is Hezbollah a terrorist organization but it is one of the most violent. Hezbollah is known for using terrorist tactics, such as suicide bombings and missile attacks, to promote its agenda of imposing an Iranian style Islamic rule in the Middle East.

It is a well-known fact that Canadian intelligence agencies say that Hezbollah has operatives in every major city in the country and that it has been using Canada as an offshore base for a decade. In its 2000 report on international terrorism CSIS reported that Canada was a primary venue of opportunity to support, plan or mount terrorist attacks.

Just recently Senator Bob Graham of the senate intelligence committee in the United States described the leader of a Canadian cell of Hezbollah as making bin Laden look like a schoolboy. According to the United States, Canada is proving to be a true haven for Hezbollah and not only will the government not ban this known terrorist organization, we will not extradite Hezbollah members to the United States to face justice as it is requesting.

If the government were in fact truly committed to the global war on terrorism, the Solicitor General would ensure that the list is complete and that it does not take such an inordinate amount of time to bring forward those names and entities. Clearly, our intelligence agencies, particularly CSIS, are overwhelmed by the tremendous workload thrust upon them since September 11. By the CSIS director's own admission, more resources are needed if we are to determine and list all terrorist activity.

I implore the Solicitor General to list Hezbollah, to recognize that it is a threat to world peace and to the safety of Canadians.

[Correctional Service Canada, November 18th, 2002]

Mr. Speaker, it is awfully hard to rehabilitate them back into society when we do not know where they are.

Repeatedly last year the Canadian Alliance brought forward case after case where police officers acting in the line of duty were murdered by parolees. According to Correctional Service Canada's own statistics last year, convicts on parole committed 6 murders, 10 attempted murders, 60 major assaults, 33 rapes and 102 armed robberies.

I ask the Solicitor General, how many more police officers and innocent Canadians have to die before he puts an end to this--