Paul Calandra

[Ending Early Release for Criminals and Increasing Offender Accountability Act, October 19th, 2010]

Mr. Speaker, it is truly remarkable. It gives me great confidence in the people of Canada when I hear members of the NDP speak, because in their wisdom, the people of Canada know better than to ever give that group of people the mandate to run this country.

It is truly remarkable that there is a group of people in the Parliament of Canada who would actually suggest that victims want criminals on the street. It is absolutely unbelievable to me.

My seatmate in the House is a passionate advocate for the victims of crime. Has the hon. member ever asked her if she wants to see the person who perpetrated the crime against her family out on the street, or if she feels a sense of sympathy that criminals may have to double-bunk for a couple of years until we build more prisons? I doubt it, because you are too busy talking to the criminals in the prisons who are advocating for better treatment, who are worried about whether they will get certain things. The hon. member should speak to the victims, not the criminals. It is absolutely unbelievable.

The hon. member talked about police officers. Which party do police officers and the brave chiefs of police decide to run with when they run for office? They come to the Conservative Party because they understand that the Conservative Party reflects the values of police. It respects the values of Canadians.The member for Oxford and the former commissioner of the OPP who is running in Vaughan understand what the NDP do not understand, which is why the NDP will always be a rump in the House. They understand that Canadians want a balanced justice system. Canadians want a government, and they finally have one, that puts the rights of victims ahead of the rights of criminals. When will the member finally understand that it costs Canadians--

[Ending Early Release for Criminals and Increasing Offender Accountability Act, October 19th, 2010]

Mr. Speaker, it is quite ironic to be in the House and listen to the member opposite comparing criminals to children. I have two kids of my own, a two year old and a four year old. I can assure the hon. member that they are not stealing cars, or breaking and entering into people's homes. They are not home invaders. I hasten to say that I do not treat them like I would treat someone who would kill someone, steal cars or invade someone's privacy.

It is truly remarkable to hear about the poor criminals who might have to share a cell with someone after they have murdered or invaded someone's home late at night, as they have been doing in my community of Stouffville. Police have recently issued a warning because breaking and entering late at night is on the increase as are incidences of auto theft. We have the poor victims who find themselves confronting someone at two o'clock in the morning in their home, yet we hear about the poor criminals who are going to have to share a cell with someone. We finally are ramping up our criminal justice system to put the rights of the victims ahead of the criminals.

The members keep talking about the costs associated with balancing the justice system. They like to talk about statistics Canada and how crime is on the decrease. How about Statistics Canada reporting that costs of crime to our economy and to families is over $70 billion a year? Those are 2003 figures. The cost of pain and suffering to victims is $35 billion a year. Those are the real costs of crime.

When the member talks about the cost, why does he not talk about the cost to victims of crime? Only the NDP, the opposition coalition, fronted by the leader of the Liberal Party, but led by two failed NDP premiers, would suggest that somehow Canadians do not want people who commit crimes to be in jail, that we should put the focus on them as opposed to the victims of the crime.

When will the member sit down with real people in his riding, victims, and find out what they really want? It is a criminal justice system that represents Canadians and puts the rights of victims ahead of criminals once and for all.

[Ending Early Release for Criminals and Increasing Offender Accountability Act, October 19th, 2010]

Madam Speaker, I cannot help but scratch my head at the lack of understanding by the hon. member across that crime costs Canadian families in excess of $70 billion a year. That is a figure which is borne by the victims of crime predominantly. Victims across Canada are bearing 67% of the costs of crime.

The member talked about decreasing crime rates. The crime rates are decreasing because of the hard work of this government, the justice minister and this party to put a focus on crime. In my community, despite the extra resources we recently had a warning in the small town of Stouffville that property crimes are on the increase. People are breaking and entering into homes at night and there are car thefts.

There is a very real concern among Canadians that we get the job done once and for all. We have tried the failed practices of previous Liberal governments for generations and they did not tackle the problem.

Would the member not agree with me that we need to focus on protecting society? Would she not agree that we need to refocus and balance the justice system so that it puts the rights of victims ahead of those of criminals? Would she not agree that we need to focus on turning the criminal justice deficit into a society surplus by once and for all dealing with the issues of crime and keeping the people who commit crime off the streets?

The member talked about sending the bill to committee. We all know what happens when a bill from this side of the House goes into a committee dominated by the opposition coalition. The opposition members talk tough in the House, but when they get to committee and the cameras are turned off, they turn legislation over and restore the focus back on the criminals and not on the victims of crime. There is a complete focus on trying to rehabilitate people who have committed crime after crime.

For once it would be refreshing to stand in the House and to have members focus on the people who matter, the victims of crime, and to turn that $70 billion deficit into a surplus once and for all.

[Ending Early Release for Criminals and Increasing Offender Accountability Act, October 19th, 2010]

Madam Speaker, we know crime actually costs the Canadian economy more than $70 billion a year. The last statistics we have indicate that 67% of that is borne by the victims of crime. Auto theft costs the Canadian economy $1 billion a year.

I wonder if the hon. member would agree that one of the primary functions of government is to protect its people and that it is about time we stopped shifting the blame to the victims and started taking responsibility as a government.

I wonder if he would have some insight as to why the opposition would not support making the rights of victims a priority in all of our criminal justice legislation.

I wonder if there are any other bills that he might want to talk about that could give Canadians confidence that their justice system is finally being reformed to put the rights of victims ahead of criminals.

[World Sight Day, October 5th, 2010]

Mr. Speaker, I am proud to stand in the House today to welcome members of Vision 2020 Canada who are here with us to celebrate and bring awareness to World Sight Day 2010.

World Sight Day is an international day of awareness to focus attention on the global issues of avoidable blindness and visual impairment. This year's theme is “Countdown to 2020”.

Vision 2020 Canada will mark both the successes and the work that still needs to be done in the ambition to eliminate avoidable blindness across the globe by 2020.

Vision 2020 is the global initiative for the elimination of avoidable blindness, a joint program with the World Health Organization and the International Agency for the Prevention of Blindness with an international membership of NGOs, professional associations, eye care institutions and corporations.

The many successes of Vision 2020: The Right to Sight, have been achieved through a unique cross-sector collaboration which enables public, private and not for profit interests to work together helping people all over the world to see.

[Citizenship Act, September 28th, 2010]

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to speak today to Bill C-467.

I have had the privilege of working with the member for St. Catharines on the citizenship and immigration committee since I was elected. He has been a spectacular leader and I have learned a lot from him. I have also worked with the minister who has brought forward a number of changes and has a passion for this portfolio that has been unmatched by many others. It has been one of my great pleasures since I have been here to be able to do that.

Bill C-467, as was mentioned by my colleague, stems from Bill C-37, an act to amend the Citizenship Act. Because of the demonstrated need for stability, simplicity and consistency in citizenship status, the 39th Parliament passed Bill C-37 which restored Canadians citizenship to individuals who fell into different categories.

For example: they may have lost their Canadian citizenship by becoming citizens of another country either as an adult or a minor; they may have lost their citizenship when they took an oath of citizenship in another country which included a clause that renounced any other citizenship; or, they were born abroad and lost their Canadian citizenship under the 1947 act because they were living outside of Canada on their 24th birthday and failed to take steps to keep it.

The so-called border babies born under 1947 citizenship act had to take steps to register as a Canadian citizen and, if they failed to do so, they never became Canadian citizens.

Bill C-37 protected citizenship for the future by limiting citizenship by descent to the first generation born abroad. That was as a result of consultations that we had heard across the country. What that means is that subsequent generations born abroad would no longer be given Canadian citizenship automatically. This was to end the practice of passing citizenship on endlessly to generations even if they had no real connection to Canada. The goal of fixing imperfect legislation is essentially to simplify the complex rules around citizenship.

Today, Bill C-467 calls on the government to treat children born or adopted overseas by crown servants and Canadian Forces personnel as children born in Canada, such that they would be able to pass citizenship on to any children they may have or adopt outside of Canada.

The government supports the intention of Bill C-467 but, as we have said, we have concerns with the bill in its current form as it does not achieve its intended objective and would have unintended consequences.

We have a bill before us that, if passed, would no longer enable children of crown servants, including the military serving overseas, to pass citizenship on to any children they may have or adopt outside of Canada. Bill C-467 would remove the right to citizenship under section 35 of the act which allows crown servants to pass citizenship on to children they have while serving abroad.

Effectively, this would strip citizenship from children of crown servants born or adopted abroad where the crown servant had been born abroad to a Canadian parent. Bill C-467 proposes to confer citizenship automatically to children adopted abroad by crown servants who were born or naturalized in Canada.

The current act already allows anyone who is born abroad and adopted by Canadian parents who were born in Canada, whether or not the parent is a crown servant, to apply for a grant of citizenship. The criteria for such a grant respects international obligations that are there to protect the best interests of the child, including protection from trafficking and respects provincial jurisdiction on adoptions.

It is true that under Bill C-467 , children adopted abroad by crown servants and the military would no longer have to apply for a grant of citizenship but they would also not be subject to the safeguards aimed at protecting the best interests of the child.

As a result, the bill fails to meet its objectives. The government is confident that the intent of Bill C-467 could be achieved if we expand the current exception that exists in the current act to ensure that children of crown servants, including Canadian Forces personnel, like children born in Canada, would be able to pass citizenship on to any children they have or adopt outside of Canada.

We obviously want to continue to work with our friends opposite and make this Parliament work. We have shown clear indications since we returned and since we were elected that we are willing to do what it takes to make Parliament work to get results for Canadians, whether it is on the economy, whether it is seeking the best for our Canadian armed forces, or whether it is on our justice system.

Of course, we have seen dramatic changes with respect to Canada's refugee protection system. They were brought in by the minister and ushered through committee by our parliamentary secretary from St. Catharines. We did that in a spirit of cooperation that we could all be proud of. It was one of the most satisfying days I have had in the House. It was prior to the end of the last adjournment for the summer break. All parties stood in the House and congratulated the minister, the parliamentary secretary, and each other for a job well done with respect to refugee reform.

This is another opportunity for the citizenship and immigration committee to again work together in the best interests of Canadians and the best interests of the people the bill seeks to help. I am confident that by working together and by allowing this to get to committee, where we can make the amendments that I am hopeful and confident the hon. member who introduced the bill agrees are needed, we can come up with a bill that works for all Canadians, and we can continue to be proud.

In my riding of Oak Ridges—Markham I represent one of the most diverse communities in all of Canada. We have people from all over the world, and I have been extraordinarily proud to represent them. I have heard what they are saying. We see what needs they have. We can appreciate all that new Canadians do for this country. One of the things they tell me they like best about Canada is that they understand that Canada realizes that its strength is its diversity. That is something that this government has focused on. We will continue to do what is best for new Canadians and what is best for immigrants, and hopefully we can work together to get a proper bill through on this.

[Lobbying Act, September 20th, 2010]

Mr. Speaker, today the President of the Treasury Board announced that members of Parliament, senators and staff in the opposition leader's office are no longer exempt from the lobbying rules that apply to ministers and senior public servants.

Could the minister tell the House why this is such good news for Canadian democracy?

[Business of Supply, June 17th, 2010]

Madam Speaker, I did listen to the hon. member's speech and found it somewhat troubling. We have been in government since 2006, and in that time period there has been one motion of non-confidence, which was defeated. We have passed a number of budgets, which were supported by one of the opposition parties. We have passed an economic action plan.

The real reason that this motion is being brought forward right now by the Liberals is because they actually have no policies that Canadians care to listen to. They do not care about national defence. They care more about terrorists than they do about our soldiers. They have no economic action plan. Their policies on taxes are to increase taxes on families and businesses. They want to implement a carbon tax on Canadians and kill business and kill jobs.

The last election was also about prorogation. They were not elected by the people. They were devastated. They got one of the worst results in Canadian history. Yet, the Liberals wanted to foist on Canadians prime minister, their leader, who was massively rejected by people and who Canadians said they did not want and whose policies they did not want. The Liberals wanted to seize government because that is all they care about. They do not care about Canadians. They have no policies, so they bring embarrassing motions--

[Eliminating Entitlements for Prisoners, June 2nd, 2010]

Mr. Speaker, I was shocked yesterday when I heard the Liberal MP for Ajax—Pickering defend the practice of paying old age security to prisoners.

Even though hard-working taxpayers already foot the bill for prisoners' room and board, the Liberals actually think that prisoners should receive even more benefits, benefits that are intended only for low income seniors.

Can the minister tell us what she is hearing from Canadians who actually care about victims and taxpayers?

[Nursing, May 7th, 2010]

Mr. Speaker, next week represents another National Nursing Week. First, I would like to wish happy nursing week to all the nurses and nursing students across Canada.

I would like to make a special mention to the nurses of the Markham Stouffville Hospital and York Central Hospital who service the good people of Oak Ridges—Markham every single day.

Nurses possess a tremendous amount of skill and knowledge as well as a deep sense of kindness and commitment. Without them hospitals, seniors residences and hospices could not function. When patients are at their most vulnerable, the most embarrassing situations, and the most painful situations of their lives, nurses are there to provide them with quality care, free of judgment and full of compassion.

Nursing does not fall under the list of most glamourous occupations, but it is of course, on the top of the list of most vitally important professions in this country.

Since 1971, May 12, which is Florence Nightingale's birthday, symbolizes International Nurses Day.

I encourage Canadians to give thanks to all the nurses who, without a doubt, have touched the lives of so many through their hard work and medical expertise. This is another reason why I am so proud to represent the people of Oak Ridges—Markham.