Laurie Hawn

[Afghanistan, November 16th, 2007]

Mr. Speaker, in case my colleague is hard of listening, we are working with the Afghan authorities. There does have to be an investigation. The Afghan authorities are undertaking that. We will give them whatever assistance they require.

Again, it is a work in progress. We do not tolerate any kind of abuse of prisoners, but we must remember that these people are accused of having the blood of Canadian soldiers on their hands and in fact the blood of Afghan women and children. We will get to the bottom of the situation. My colleague can be assured of that.

[Afghanistan, November 16th, 2007]

Mr. Speaker, as a matter of fact, the government took action immediately when substantiated or apparently substantiated allegations were brought forward. We are working with our partners in Afghanistan. The Afghan authorities have initiated an investigation. We are helping them with that as required.

This whole development project in Afghanistan is a work in progress. We do take it very seriously. We are working on that very hard and we will work with the Afghan authorities to find the appropriate answers.

[November 15th, 2007]

Mr. Speaker, the illegal tobacco trade is an important issue for the government. I agree with my hon. colleague that it is a difficult problem for police forces, whether it is at the border, the RCMP, or local forces, to catch some of the folks who are doing it in these local areas. All police forces, the RCMP and local forces, are stretched quite badly with respect to resources.

That is why we have increased the capacity of cross border agencies. We have increased the capacity of the RCMP. It is going to take a little time to do that. The size of the force has been allowed to degrade over a number of years. We are building that back up.

There will be a lot of cooperation, as there is today, and that will improve as forces have more resources, local and RCMP, to combat these kinds of activities and that will only improve as time goes on.

[November 15th, 2007]

Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank my colleague from Jeanne-Le Ber for his contribution to this important debate. I would like to respond to his statements.

I rise in response to the question and I may not be the correct parliamentary secretary, but I will have to do.

I would like to highlight that the government recognizes the impact that illicit tobacco manufacturing sales have on Canada's economic security and on the health of Canadians. Tackling crime and ensuring Canadians' health is a high priority for our government. We are committed to keeping Canadians safe, including safe from illegal activity such as the tobacco trade.

While many people fail to recognize the sale of contraband tobacco as a serious crime, it can have a significant impact on economic security and public safety including public health.

We have taken several measures to help address the issues of contraband tobacco. At the border, and not just the border, we have begun arming border services officers and hiring an additional 400 border services guards. We have invested $19.5 million in the RCMP integrated border enforcement teams strategically located along the border to disrupt cross border smuggling.

There is also activity with local police services in the communities. In fact, with funding from the 2006 budget the RCMP is adding another 70 customs and excise members between now and 2010. These new RCMP members will be strategically deployed to enhance enforcement of cross border crime including tobacco smuggling and illegal tobacco operations elsewhere. We have also increased audits of tobacco manufacturers and growers.

The RCMP conducts a wide array of enforcement activities to combat contraband tobacco in close cooperation with first nations police services, where a lot of the problem resides, the Canada Border Services Agency, as well as other domestic and U.S. law enforcement agencies, not just at the border.

Canadian law enforcement agencies are working hard to combat the trade in illicit tobacco by reducing both their supply and demand.

In addition, under the federal tobacco control strategy, the RCMP and CBSA have dedicated intelligence analysts and officers to closely monitor the illicit tobacco market. This information helps develop a complete picture of the illicit tobacco trade and helps identify the highest priority threats.

As the House may know, demand for illegal cigarettes remains strong despite the health and safety risks of such products. The RCMP is aware that illicit trade in tobacco products in Canada stems from a variety of sources and closely monitors emerging trends in the manufacture and sale of illicit cigarettes. The RCMP is working in close collaboration with law enforcement agencies on both sides of the border and in the local communities to combat illicit tobacco trade and related crimes.

As a result seizure levels are currently at their highest level since the early 1990s and are a direct result of successful operations conducted across the country. In 2006 more than 500,000 cartons of illicit tobacco products were seized along with vehicles, goods and money.

The RCMP strategy outlines concrete actions that are being undertaken over the next three years. These include: collaborating with domestic and U.S. partners to interdict key criminals and seize their proceeds of crime through innovative cooperative law enforcement models, and heightening awareness about the public safety and health consequences of the illicit tobacco trade, whether cross border or in the local communities.

These collaborative measures taken by the RCMP, CBSA and domestic and U.S. partners are concrete actions to reduce the availability and the demand for contraband tobacco products.

[National Peacekeepers’ Day Act, November 15th, 2007]

Mr. Speaker, I listened with interest and I commend my colleague on his effort and commitment to this cause.

August 9 had a special meaning for me. I was driving down the autobahn in Germany, between Baden and Lahr, when I heard the news on the radio of that incident. In fact, the pilot of that airplane was a friend of mine named Keith Mirau. He and I had been flying instructors together in years previous.

I have to admonish my hon. colleague just a little. Keith would bristle at being called a soldier. He was an airman, but I know there was no intent there.

I have not so much a question, but a comment to reinforce something my colleague said. Everything every member of the Canadian Forces does every day is about peace in one way of another, peacekeeping, peacemaking, bringing peace, as my colleague said. I would like people to, as he mentioned, broaden their definition of peacekeepers.

The folks in uniform and the folks out of uniform, who he mentioned, contribute incredibly to peace around the world in one way or another. We owe them our thanks and August 9 is a great day to do that, to just pause and reflect.

He may wish to respond to that or not, but congratulations on a good effort.

[Canada Elections Act, November 15th, 2007]

You didn't see this problem in Bill C-31.

[Canada Elections Act, November 15th, 2007]

Mr. Speaker, I listened with interest to my friend gloomy-and-doomy down there as he spoke about social engineering. I want to assure him that there are no black helicopters circling his riding, or anybody else's, taking away Canadians' human rights. One would think the sky had fallen because all parties in this House made an honest error when Bill C-31 came through in the first place. That has been acknowledged by everyone except, apparently, the NDP. They voted against Bill C-31 for entirely different reasons. To suggest they saw this, of course, is completely false and disingenuous.

Credit should go to all parties that have said we need to fix this right away. The government responded. We have Bill C-18. It will fix the problem of rural voters right away. That is what was asked for and that is what is being done.

Therefore, the gloom and doom from down the way is just silly, frankly. The government has taken action. I would like to ask my hon. colleague a simple question. Is he going to support this bill or not? All parties, including his, asked for action to be taken and it is being taken. Is he supporting it or not?

[Canada Elections Act, November 15th, 2007]

Mr. Speaker, I am glad the member finished the way he did. We hear many things in the House which are specious, disingenuous and condescending. Both being new members in the House, I congratulate my colleague on being such a fast learner.

The member talked about the charter of rights, which everyone upholds. The government also has an obligation, including opposition parties, to ensure that those rights are not abused, which does not suggest for a second that any rural voter has abused those rights. I come from a riding where there was evidence of significant voter fraud during the last two elections. It is important that we uphold the rights of the charter. It is also important for us to ensure that those rights are not abused.

I thank the hon. member for his support for Bill C-6, an important issue which needed to be cleared up by all parties because all parties wanted it.

My colleague, the parliamentary secretary, did point out that all parties cooperated on recovering from an error that was made as an honest mistake by members of all parties. Therefore, there is a lot of blame to share. There is also a lot of credit to share, and the parliamentary secretary did attempt to share that credit with all members of the House.

The member spoke for 20 minutes and the last minute was terrific. The first 19 minutes qualified as those characteristics of parliamentary debate which do not sound good in this place.

Is he going to support this, yes or no? It is important and we all want it. Let us not hold it up. Let us just get on with it, support it and correct what has been done.

[Canada Elections Act, November 15th, 2007]

Mr. Speaker, I rather enjoyed my hon. colleague's silly diatribe, or entertaining diatribe I should say. He talked about blowing bubbles. Frankly, I think he was blowing smoke because all parties in the House agreed that something needed to be done quickly. This government has shown leadership by tabling this bill.

We would love to move on to Bill C-18, which is a significant problem that the government has already dealt with expeditiously. We would ask for the opposition's help in doing this. Let us get Bill C-6 behind us. All four parties agreed that this needs to be done, so why are they stalling? Why are they not showing leadership on this issue? They talk about leadership. Let us show some leadership in the House together with the government and get it behind us so we can move on. We need to quit stalling and get on with it.

[Nuclear Liability and Compensation Act, October 30th, 2007]

Mr. Speaker, I listened with interest, as I always do, to my hon. colleague whose passion for the environment I applaud and I share.

However, I would like to talk about insurance just for a minute. Insurance is all about risk assessment. If I do something stupid with my car, my insurance company will pay someone $2 million. If the person does not think that is enough, there are ways the person can get more out of me.

I wonder if my hon. colleague believes that the Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission is a credible organization. It has said that the maximum foreseeable liability for a worst case scenario is anywhere from $1 million to $100 million. Risk assessment for insurance, of course, is based on standards, on history and on many things that are factored into that assessment. That is what insurance is all about. All insurance has a limited liability, regardless of whether it is for my car or for a situation like this.

Does my colleague believe that the Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission is a credible body? If the answer is no, fine, he can disregard the question. However, if the answer is yes, then why not give some credence to its assessment of this situation?