Olivia Chow

[Canada Consumer Product Safety Act, June 12th, 2009]

Mr. Speaker, most often there are several chemicals found in toys. Whether it is lead, phthalates, cadmium, these do tremendous damage to children and pregnant women. Could the member talk about how the bill will impact on the toy industry as it relates to imports, especially the 65% of the imports? Many of these toys and products connected to children have these chemicals in them, which are very dangerous.

[Message from the Senate, June 11th, 2009]

Mr. Speaker, if I were a nanny or a live-in caregiver, giving me a flyer about immigration fraud would not be enough because I may still be ripped off and told to work in a home even though I may not have the right visa to do so. That could still happen.

One of the recommendations in the report was about enforcement. Whether it is Citizenship and Immigration Canada, the Canada Border Services Agency, the RCMP, CSIS, or the Canada Revenue Agency, we have to work with provincial partners to make sure we investigate and enforce. There must be sanctions. We must ensure that people will be punished if they are violating the Criminal Code or the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act.

I believe that investigation is important and enforcement must take place.

[Message from the Senate, June 11th, 2009]

Mr. Speaker, I want to do a quick history in four minutes on how the Canadian government has been soft on crime against immigrants, soft on crime against migrants and soft on crime against nannies.

We need to regulate, educate and enforce. In the early 1980s there was an exclusive article by Victor Malarek in the Globe and Mail about how vulnerable people, new immigrants or people who were trying to become immigrants, were being ripped off. Nothing happened and the problem got worse.

In 1995 the then Liberal government thought it was a real problem so it did a study and tabled the report, “Immigration Consultants: It is Time to Act”, but action is what Canadians did not get. I am not surprised that the Liberal government did not get the job done. Between 1995 and 2002, nothing happened. There was no action whatsoever. Various immigration ministers made speeches and promises, but nothing got done. By October 2002 another minister established an advisory committee to talk some more. Then a year later, the Liberal minister at the time knew something had to be done because an election was getting close.

That minister set up a non-profit organization that has no power to regulate and no power to sanction consultants who are not members. It cannot seek judicial enforcement or have any disciplinary consequence. It is a complete paper tiger. It does not do anything. It sounds good. It is called the Canadian Society of Immigration Consultants, but it has no power whatsoever. Because its jurisdiction is not governed by statute, there is no possibility for a dissatisfied member and others to influence the internal functioning through a judicial review.

During committee hearings last year, we heard that the board of directors is not accountable to anyone. By the way, this is from the report of the Standing Committee on Citizenship and Immigration on immigration consultants, tabled in the House in June 2008. The report said that the society lacks transparency, has no plan, the fees are too high, et cetera. It is unaccountable and it is not working at all.

Consultants can set up shop but nothing can happen to them because there are no regulations. What did we do? We did a study again and we tabled a report in the House. The report said that we had to do three things very quickly. One, we have to regulate by putting in legislation and setting up a non-share capital corporation, similar to a law society, a society of engineers or any other profession. Accountants have to belong to an association or a society. A person could be criminally charged for practising as a doctor or a lawyer, when the person is not.

However, immigration consultants do not need any qualifications. They can just set up shop. Some are unscrupulous. They can rip people off and nothing can happen to them.

The report said we should legislate. We should also make sure that we enforce. It said that there should be some procedures for complaints. We should change the immigration manual to make sure that people who need a consultant--

[Petitions, June 10th, 2009]

Mr. Speaker, I have a petition to present to the House today, which calls on the House of Commons not to proceed with the Canada-Colombia trade deal.

The petitioners are extremely concerned about human rights violations and violence against workers and members of civil society by paramilitary groups in Colombia that are closely connected to the current government and the current president.

More than 2,200 trade unionists have been murdered since 1991, and there has been a host of violence against Afro-Colombians, human rights activists, workers, farmers, labour leaders and journalists.

The petitioners state that the Colombia trade deal follows a framework similar to NAFTA and that the NAFTA trade deal has not been effective in protecting labour standards, as in the case of Mexico where over one million agricultural jobs have been lost since NAFTA was signed.

The petitioners also state that labour protection and environmental protection are not adequate.

That is why Canada should not proceed with this deal.

[Canada Marine Act, June 10th, 2009]

moved for leave to introduce Bill C-415, An Act to amend the Canada Marine Act (City of Toronto) and other Acts in consequence.

Mr. Speaker, I am moving, seconded by the member for Nanaimo—Cowichan, a bill to amend the Canada Marine Act to return the Toronto Port Authority to the hands of Toronto city council.

The City of Toronto had control of its port, but eight years ago the federal government confiscated the port, took control of it against the wishes of the people of Toronto and the government of Toronto.

Since its inception, the Toronto Port Authority has been rocked by scandal, mismanagement and wasteful spending. It refused to work with the city and other public agencies to revitalize the waterfront. Instead, this rogue agency sued the city and threatened the federal government. Some $82 million later, this unaccountable port authority has its hand out again asking Canadian taxpayers for millions in subsidies.

For the sake of a clean, green waterfront, it is time to dissolve the Toronto Port Authority and return its assets and the land to the hands of the City of Toronto.

(Motions deemed adopted, bill read the first time and printed)

[Public Transit, June 9th, 2009]

Mr. Speaker, the know-it-all minister does not understand that the streetcars come from Bombardier, a Canadian company hiring Canadians. The know-it-all minister does not realize that Toronto streetcars do qualify for this funding. There are immediate jobs created here, planning, engineering and tooling jobs. It is good for the economy and good for the environment. However, all the Minister of Transport has to offer to Toronto are swear words and contempt.

When will the government give Toronto the streetcar funding it deserves and needs desperately?

[Public Transit, June 9th, 2009]

Mr. Speaker, the Conservative government is arrogant, vicious and hurtful.

One minister finds cancer sexy. Believe me, cancer is not sexy. The same minister gouged taxpayers when she was the boss of the Toronto Port Authority. Then the Minister of Transport covered it up by hijacking the constitution of the port authority and stuffing the board with his cronies. Yesterday he cursed and gave the finger to the people and the government of Toronto.

Will he apologize here publicly and admit that he is wrong?

[Canada-Portugal Day Act, June 5th, 2009]

moved for leave to introduce Bill C-409, An Act respecting a Canada-Portugal Day.

Madam Speaker, I am pleased to move, seconded by the member for Hamilton Centre, an act respecting a Canada-Portugal day.

Every year on June 10, in Canada and throughout the world, persons of Portuguese origin, and some of us who are not, remember their cultural roots by celebrating the life of Luís Vaz de Camões, the author of Os Lusíadas, the epic poem about the history of Portugal prior to 1500.

June 10 should be known as Canada-Portugal day in recognition of the history of the Portuguese Canadian community and to celebrate its immense and significant contribution to Canada.

(Motions deemed adopted, bill read the first time and printed)

[Controlled Drugs and Substances Act, June 5th, 2009]

Mr. Speaker, the mayors of the big cities are actually meeting right now. They met yesterday, and the Federation of Canadian Municipalities is meeting today in Alberta. They have called for a four-pillar approach: prevention, treatment, harm reduction and enforcement. This has been proven successful in the United States, the U.K. and Europe.

In 2002 the report of the special House committee on the non-medical use of drugs, the office of the Auditor General and the Senate committee called for strengthened leadership, coordination and accountability, with dedicated resources. It talked about enhancing data collection to set measurable objectives, evaluate programs and report on progress. It talked about a balance of supply and demand in activities across government, and it talked very specifically about increased emphasis on prevention, treatment and rehabilitation.

That has been recommended since 2002, but that is not what the government is doing. The government is driven by ideology, supported by Liberal MPs on the other side. Basically at the end of the day, when the bill passes, more young people will be put in jail. That is ideology instead of evidence, because the evidence says that Bill C-15--

[Controlled Drugs and Substances Act, June 5th, 2009]

Mr. Speaker, the drug treatment courts try to divert people to treatment programs, but they are desperately inadequate and underfunded. There is a huge waiting list. Waiting for a drug treatment court means that dangerously long wait times for drug treatment would be further lengthened. It makes it worse. Most users need immediate access to service when they have to undergo treatment. Depending upon where one lives, current wait times range from months up to a year in this country.

I spoke to a young woman and her father face to face. The father was quite active in the Rotary Club. He described to me how tough it was to enrol his daughter in a drug treatment program. At a point when she was ready to change her life and conquer her addiction, there were no facilities available in Toronto or in Ontario.

What did he have to do? Thank goodness, he had some money. He had to send his daughter to the United States to a drug treatment program, and it was successful. She came back and started a small campaign with the Rotary Club of Toronto to say to both the provincial and federal governments that they must establish more drug treatment programs, especially those that are community-based and long-term, so that other families do not have to send their kids to the United States for treatment.

Members may talk about the drug treatment court and diverting people into treatment, but if there is no treatment or if people have to wait a long time, how would it work? It just will not work.

This element in the bill reveals that the real intention of this bill is to target low-level users, not organized crime. A drug lord, for example, or a big shot would not be taken to the drug treatment court. This shows that even though it seems like a good idea, unless we invest in drug treatment programs, the treatment court is going to have limited success.