Mark Warawa

[Petitions, April 13th, 2010]

Madam Speaker, I have three petitions. The first one is regarding suicide. It says that the people who experience depression and mental illness need to be protected by the law; that youth in Canada are just as vulnerable as youth from around the world; and that predators are both encouraging and counselling suicide without penalty through the Internet.

The petitioners are calling upon the House of Commons to enable prosecution of those who endanger or encourage or counsel someone to commit suicide by updating the Criminal Code of Canada to reflect the new realities of the 21st century.

[The Environment, April 12th, 2010]

Mr. Speaker, Bill C-311 is an NDP climate change bill that would devastate the economic recovery. It would force Canada to diverge from the aggressive targets that our government and President Obama have identified.

The NDP does not get it. An effective climate change plan must be done in partnership with our international trading partners and it must be done with economic realities.

[Petitions, March 31st, 2010]

Mr. Speaker, in the last petition, the petitioners wish to bring to the attention of the House that Canada is a country that respects human rights and includes in the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms that everyone has the right to life.

The petitioners call upon Parliament to pass legislation for the protection of human life from the time of conception until natural death.

[Petitions, March 31st, 2010]

Mr. Speaker, in the third petition, the petitioners wish to draw to the attention of the House that the long gun registry, which was originally budgeted to cost Canadians $2 million but the price tag has spiralled out of control to an estimated $2 billion a decade later, has not saved one life since it was introduced.

The petitioners call upon the House of Commons to support any legislation that would cancel the Canadian long gun registry and streamline the Firearms Act.

[Petitions, March 31st, 2010]

Mr. Speaker, the next petition I am introducing is on medical benefits.

As there are a number of severe, potentially life-threatening conditions that do not qualify for disability programs because they are not necessarily permanent, the petitioners call upon the House of Commons to enact specific and precise legislation to provide additional medical EI benefits at least equal to maternity EI benefits.

[Petitions, March 31st, 2010]

Mr. Speaker, I rise to present four petitions today. The first petition is on skin cancer.

The petitioners wish to draw the attention of the House to the fact that one in seven Canadians will develop skin cancer in their lifetime, that melanoma is the most serious type of skin cancer and one of the most rapidly increasing cancers in Canada and the second most common cancer in young adults, and that education, resources and treatment are extremely limited.

The petitioners call upon the Government of Canada to support a national skin cancer and melanoma initiative to provide much needed access to newer drug treatments and funding for research and educational programs.

[March 29th, 2010]

Mr. Speaker, the government is extremely proud of the quality of appointments made today to our superior courts across the country.

The Government of Canada recognizes the importance of supporting and assisting the development of the official language minority communities. To that end, in June 2008 the government announced the road map to Canada's linguistic duality, which is an unprecedented government-wide commitment with a budget of $1.1 billion based on the two pillars of participation of all in linguistic duality and support for official language minority communities in the priority sectors of health, justice, immigration, economic development, arts and culture. Unfortunately, the hon. member did not support that budget, but it happened.

As the government has stated in the past, the overriding principle guiding the selection of members of the judiciary, including those of the highest court, is that of merit, and we are proud of that.

[March 29th, 2010]

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to stand today and affirm this government's commitment to providing access to justice in both official languages.

The Government of Canada is strongly committed to enhancing the vitality of English and French linguistic minorities in Canada and fostering the full recognition and use of both English and French in Canadian society, including our justice system.

The hon. member has raised the particular issue of the filling of vacancies in the Nova Scotia Supreme Court. We recognize that there must be significant linguistic capacity in our courts to provide equal access to justice in both French and English. I can confirm that bilingualism is already one of the enumerated criteria in the assessment of the judicial candidates by the judicial advisory committees. This ability is evaluated along with 14 other criteria, such as intellectual ability and analytical skills.

I am confident that the current appointment process has been crafted in a way that permits the Minister of Justice to address the need for access to justice in both official languages and to ensure that the federal judiciary linguistic profile provides adequate access to justice in both official language minority communities.

Under the current process, before recommending appointments, the minister confers with the chief justice of the relevant court to determine the court's needs, including linguistic capacity.

As hon. members are likely aware, a court's chief justice's primary responsibility is the overall direction of sitting on his or her court and the assignment of the judges. The chief justice strives to ensure that all cases, especially criminal, are heard in a timely manner.

The chief justice is, therefore, well positioned in terms of understanding the needs of the communities served and identifying particular needs where vacancies arise. As a result, the minister consults with the chief justice of the court for which a candidate is being considered to allow them to bring to his or her attention any particular needs to be addressed, including bilingual capacity.

The minister also welcomes the advice of any group or individuals on considerations which should be taken into account when filling current vacancies. It is important to understand that the federal judicial appointments process operates on the basis of detailed personal applications from interested candidates and, as such, relies primarily on a system of self-identification.

With a view to improving the pool of bilingual judicial candidates, the government invites the French-speaking jurist associations and their national federation to identify and courage individuals with the necessary qualifications to apply and to share their recommendations with the Minister of Justice.

While bilingualism remains an important criterion considered in the appointment process, it is not and should not be an overriding factor in the selection of our judges. The primary consideration in all judicial appointments is legal excellence and merit. Further criteria includes proficiency in the law, judgment, work habits, writing and communication skills, honesty, integrity, fairness and social awareness.

Our current process allows the government to take into account the bilingual capacity of candidates and to address the need for access to justice in both official languages.

[March 29th, 2010]

Mr. Speaker, two blue ribbon panels have called for greater use of the substitution mechanism.

In 2004 the External Advisory Committee on Smart Regulation appointed by the previous government recommended this approach. In 2008 the Competition Policy Review Panel heard that improving certainty and timeliness, and reducing duplication for environmental assessment is key.

In 2006 a pilot substitution was used so that the National Energy Board hearings replaced a review panel for the Emera Brunswick Pipeline in New Brunswick. An evaluation of this effort by the Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency concluded that the substitution process was a great success.

[March 29th, 2010]

Mr. Speaker, au contraire. I respect the member highly but she has it wrong, very wrong. She would have Canadians performing environmental assessments when they paint benches in Parks Canada, so she has it wrong.

This government is committed to environmental protection and sustainable development. Environmental assessments help us meet those objectives. Improving projects designed to prevent environmental harm before construction is both cost effective and prudent.

Budget 2010 will reduce duplication that results when the environmental assessment process and another federal process with public hearings apply to the same project. It gets rid of the duplication. Duplication is wasteful. It diverts taxpayers dollars away from the concrete actions that protect the environment. It adds unnecessary costs to the development of the projects that bring investments and jobs to Canada. That is what Canadians want: good, clean, green jobs.

Anyone who supports unnecessary duplication like the NDP is against strong environmental protection, investments and jobs for Canadians. A few facts are necessary to set the record straight.

Every year the Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission and the National Energy Board conduct dozens of environmental assessments of large, complex projects. That is not new. They have done so for 15 years.

The National Energy Board has 50 expert environmental staff engaged in this important work. It has a long record of hearing and evaluating environmental evidence along with safety, technical, economic and cultural information. The board makes significant efforts to facilitate public participation and that of aboriginal Canadians. Public hearings are held as close as possible to the affected communities.

The Nuclear Safety and Control Act states that the mission of the Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission is to protect the health, safety and security of persons, and the environment. The commission has 40 expert staff devoted to environmental assessment and environmental protection. It is a leader in ensuring public participation opportunities are part of every environmental assessment.

There are special cases when a review panel appointed by the Minister of the Environment under the Canadian Environmental Assessment Act is used for a project because of the high potential for significant environmental effects and public concern.

Under the initiatives of budget 2010, the Minister of the Environment will use his power, where appropriate, to allow the public hearing process of the Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission and the National Energy Board to substitute for a review panel when the project is also regulated by one of these bodies.

The Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission and the National Energy Board have public hearings. They are well versed in applying the act and it only makes common sense to use these processes to the extent possible.

This authority for submission was established by Parliament when the act passed in 1992. The fundamentals of environmental assessment are not changing and the requirements of the act will continue to be met.