Pat Martin

[Louis Riel Act, September 29th, 2011]

moved for leave to introduce Bill C-302, An Act respecting Louis Riel.

Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague from Sudbury for seconding the bill.

The bill would call upon the government to reverse the conviction of Louis Riel on the premise that Louis Riel was a hero, not a traitor. We do not seek to have Louis Riel pardoned, because a pardon would imply that he was guilty of something and we now forgive him. We seek to exonerate Louis Riel.

We should take note that Louis Riel was a member of Parliament. He was elected three times to the Canadian Parliament and was never allowed to take his seat, although Métis lore has it that he did paddle his canoe to the foot of Parliament Hill with his Métis colleagues, climbed the cliff, entered his name into the permanent record and took his seat one night in 1871.

The people of Manitoba have recognized Louis Riel as a hero. There is a statue of Louis Riel on the grounds of Manitoba's legislative building.

On behalf of the Métis people of Canada, we believe that exonerating Louis Riel would be in the same spirit as the formal apology the Prime Minister gave to the survivors of Indian residential schools. We believe it is a necessary prerequisite to healing the relationship between the Métis people and the Government of Canada.

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

[Open Government Act, September 29th, 2011]

moved for leave to introduce Bill C-301, An Act to amend the Access to Information Act (open government).

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to introduce the open government act. I want to recognize and pay tribute to the former information commissioner, John Reid. He and his staff actually drafted all of this bill to illustrate the shortcomings of an act that has not been reviewed since 1983.

I would also point out that the adoption of the bill actually would fulfill the campaign promise of the Conservative Party which, in its campaign literature in 2006, promised to introduce John Reid's open government act. It found its way into the federal accountability legislation in 2006 but was promptly removed by the time that bill received first reading.

The bill would seek to enhance and expand the access to information regime in this country. It would create a public interest override. The public interest would override the interests of the government in keeping something secret. It would seek to enhance the ability of members of the general public to know what their government was doing with their money, which I argue is a fundamental freedom and a cornerstone of any western democracy.

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

[Asbestos Industry, September 27th, 2011]

Mr. Speaker, asbestos is the greatest industrial killer that the world has ever known, yet this country continues to export nearly 200,000 tonnes per year into underdeveloped nations that have virtually no health and safety protocols.

Instead of shovelling even more corporate welfare into this made-in-Canada epidemic, why does the government not use that money for economic diversification for the asbestos region of Quebec to get it out of this deadly and dying industry?

[Safe Streets and Communities Act, September 27th, 2011]

Mr. Speaker, perhaps my colleague from Mississauga South would agree that if longer prison sentences in and of themselves meant safer streets, the United States would have the safest streets in the world. The Americans lock up people at a higher rate than any other country. Even they have seen the folly in their ways. Would she not concede that the United States has now confessed that it was wrong and changed its practices and is dedicating more of the money it is saving by not building more prisons to prevention and substance abuse programs and treatment and rehabilitation? The U.S. is now enjoying a reduction.

Why are we borrowing billions and billions of dollars to build more prisons when we know full well it will not make our streets any safer? Is this not just a cheap pandering to the Conservatives' voting base?

[Safe Streets and Communities Act, September 27th, 2011]

Mr. Speaker, what worries me most about my colleague's speech is that he fails to take note of or at least recognize or acknowledge that we have 30 years of empirical evidence to draw from as testimony to the predictable consequences and outcomes of the course of action that the government is taking.

I am making reference to the tough on crime initiative of the United States, which American legislators are now saying has been a catastrophic failure and not only a catastrophic failure but it is bankrupting the 50 states. They have been building prisons and stacking up prisoners like cordwood for the last 30 years, to the point where they had to privatize the prison system, bringing in Halliburton to provide jails and to feed the prisoners, and bankrupting states. The streets are no safer.

Is my colleague aware of the recent trend in the United States that has stopped building more prisons, stopped mandatory minimum sentences, and is putting the money that is saved into crime prevention, especially in the context of drug rehabilitation and in dealing with the mentally ill rather than locking them up, giving them treatment? Prevention rather than punishment is the trend.

[Safe Streets and Communities Act, September 27th, 2011]

Mr. Speaker, along the same vein, has my colleague seen an article by Newt Gingrich in The Washington Post. He cites that the Americans 30 years of tough on crime legislation has been a catastrophic failure. He cites recent empirical evidence for the state of Texas where in 2007 it decided that building more prisons rather than opting for prevention was a mistake and it has changed that now, saving $2 billion. That money has been put into drug courts, which deal with substance abuse as a medical instead of a criminal problem, and into several crime prevention measures instead of punitive measures to make its streets safer. Because of that, its crime rates have dropped by 10% in that short period of time. Is he aware of that?

[Petitions, September 27th, 2011]

Mr. Speaker, I have the honour today to introduce to the House a petition signed by literally thousands of Canadians from right across the country who call upon Parliament to take note that asbestos is the greatest industrial killer that the world has ever known. They point out that more Canadians now die from asbestos than all other industrial and occupational causes combined and yet Canada remains one of the largest producers and exporters of asbestos in the world, spending millions of dollars subsidizing the asbestos industry and blocking international efforts to curb its use.

Therefore, the petitioners call upon Parliament to ban asbestos in all of its forms and institute a just transition program for any asbestos workers who may be affected and economic development opportunities for the communities in which they live. They also call upon the government to end all subsidies of asbestos, both in Canada and abroad. They also plea that Parliament stop blocking international health and safety conventions designed to protect workers from asbestos, such as the Rotterdam Convention.

[President of the Treasury Board, September 23rd, 2011]

Mr. Speaker, next to out and out corruption, nothing offends the sensibilities of Canadians as much as patronage pork-barrelling.

We now know that the President of the Treasury Board was setting up his buddies with lucrative and generous G8-related consulting contracts, as if, again, he had this money to dole out.

It is that kind of “who you know” politics that fuels the cynicism in an already jaded electorate.

I want to ask the Conservatives what ever happened to the Public Appointments Commission that was supposed to put an end to patronage. What ever happened to the Federal Accountability Act?

[President of the Treasury Board, September 23rd, 2011]

Mr. Speaker, the President of the Treasury Board did not invent rum bottle politics or unbridled patronage but he has certainly raised it to a high art.

We now know that the member for Parry Sound—Muskoka bought the 2008 election using the public treasury as his personal campaign war chest.

As much as we love hearing from the member for Calgary East read us prepared notes, I am not asking him. I am asking how the Prime Minister can put up with a Treasury Board President who violates his own Treasury Board guidelines to such an egregious extent.

[Petitions, September 22nd, 2011]

Mr. Speaker, I am proud to rise today to present a petition signed by thousands of Canadians from all across Canada who call upon the House of Commons to take note that asbestos is the greatest industrial killer that the world has ever known. In fact, they point out that more Canadians now die from asbestos than from all other industrial and occupational causes combined.

The petitioners also draw the attention of the House to the fact that Canada remains one of the largest producers and exporters of asbestos in the world and that not only is asbestos not banned in Canada, but Canada still spends millions of dollars subsidizing and promoting the asbestos industry and blocking international efforts to curb its use.

Therefore, the petitioners call upon Parliament to ban asbestos in all its forms and institute a just transition program for asbestos workers and the communities they live in. They also call upon Parliament to end all government subsidies of asbestos both in Canada and abroad and that the government stop blocking international health and safety conventions designed to protect workers from asbestos, such as the Rotterdam Convention.