Linda Duncan

[Strengthening Military Justice in the Defence of Canada Act, October 22nd, 2012]

Mr. Speaker, I thank the hon. member for his speech on this critical matter and for trying to keep us awake and alert in the House because it is an important matter to be paying attention to.

There is a lot of material that has come forward here and in committee. Many experts have testified, including Colonel Michel Drapeau who is a renowned Canadian lawyer, professor and author on military justice. His commentary on the way that the government has proceeded with this legislation is along these lines. He has said that what the government is bringing forward is still deficient in major areas and “requires more than tweaks and tinkering to bring it into the 21st century”.

It has been made clear today that in the last iteration of the bill, of which there have been many since 2003, there were substantive changes brought forward to the bill tabled by the government, which were agreed to by all members of the committee. The concern is that the majority of those amendments have disappeared.

Is the member concerned that it becomes a pointless exercise in the House when the government is simply going pro forma through the process of going to committee? What is the likelihood that the Conservatives will actually accept the amendments this time around and make it a proper bill?

[Petitions, October 22nd, 2012]

Mr. Speaker, the third petition is from Albertans calling on the government to stop muzzling government scientists, to reverse the cuts to science research and to restore the National Council of Welfare and the First Nations Statistical Institute.

[Petitions, October 22nd, 2012]

Mr. Speaker, the second petition is from people in Leduc, Edmonton, Calgary, Fort Saskatchewan, Red Deer, St. Albert, Spruce Grove and Nanton who support Bill C-393, the bill to reform Canada's access to medicines regime to provide affordable, life-saving generic medicines to developing nations.

[Petitions, October 22nd, 2012]

Mr. Speaker, I have three petitions to present today.

The first petition is from people in Edmonton, Sherwood Park, Bonnyville, St. Albert and Lac La Biche in Alberta who are calling upon the government to restore federal money for Katimavik.

[Safe Food for Canadians Act, October 22nd, 2012]

Mr. Speaker, while we would agree there needs to be a thorough audit of what went on, along the lines of what Sheila Weatherill recommended for listeriosis, would the member agree that it would be useful, as was the case under the Environmental Protection Act, to actually bring in the field level inspectors and union representatives?

The member for Medicine Hat had previously said that not only temporary foreign workers but refugees also work in this plant. Would the member agree that it would be useful to take these hearings to Brooks and hear from the people who work on the ground?

[Safe Food for Canadians Act, October 22nd, 2012]

Mr. Speaker, we appreciate that the government has finally brought the bill before the House. Obviously, there has been a lot of concern within the Canadian public about the safety of food. They are hoping for strong powers in mandating staffing and intervention by the government.

Under previous governments and different agencies, when new “improved” legislation was brought forward, they also tabled an enforcement compliance policy. Why did they do that? It was because they recognized that a law is hollow, it is vacuous, if one does not show that one is serious about enforcement. They also tabled a plan of required staffing and training for each one of the provisions. Therefore, the minute the bill was proclaimed in effect, the staff was on the ground with the appropriate powers.

There has been a lot controversy around the switch from enforcement of food safety legislation to voluntary compliance. I wonder if the minister could speak to whether or not he is willing to have an open public review with the inspectors on returning to an enforcement compliance strategy rather than a voluntary compliance regime.

[First Nations, October 22nd, 2012]

Mr. Speaker, I thank the hon. member for tabling this motion on a very important matter for which my party is also very concerned.

As the member has pointed out, which is something that the House needs to be reminded of daily, it is the unilateral powers and responsibility of the federal government to implement the measures to provide for the government to government and nation to nation relationship with first nations, which it promised to do as recently as this past January. We have seen case after case where first nations have had to go to court to force the government to live up to the Supreme Court Mikisew decision on the duty to consult and accommodate. Superceding that, we now have the Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples.

I wonder if the member could speak to what particular measures he thinks should be first and foremost in order to move this agenda ahead so that we can start moving forward with treating the first nations as an order of government and allowing for and facilitating self-governance.

[Citizenship and Immigration, October 19th, 2012]

Mr. Speaker, my constituency office is overloaded with immigration work after the closure of the Edmonton immigration desk, this after the Minister of Citizenship, Immigration and Multiculturalism has left northern Albertans in legal limbo with no citizenship judge for 10 long months.

I wrote to the minister demanding that he appoint a new citizenship judge for northern Alberta last June. He found one for his home town of Calgary months ago. Why has he left the rest of Alberta out in the cold for so long? Will he immediately appoint a citizenship judge?

[Indian Act Amendment and Replacement Act, October 18th, 2012]

Mr. Speaker, I regret intervening, but I am right beside the hon. member and I cannot hear her because there is so much noise on the other side heckling her.

[Business of Supply, October 18th, 2012]

Mr. Speaker, as a number of the members in the House have said, the request for the minister to resign is not taken lightly and it is not expressed frequently by this party. Many times, this side of the House requested that the Prime Minister intervene and replace the minister. Why did we do that? Because the minister was clearly not accepting his responsibility for this matter to move more expeditiously. He simply was not admitting that there was a problem with the system in place.

Therefore, the minister has the power to resign. He could take on another portfolio. We are simply asking him to do the right thing.