Paul Dewar

[Situation in Sudan, October 3rd, 2006]

Mr. Chair, I mentioned earlier that we presently have a peace accord that is about to expire. The African Union is begging for help. They turned to the Sudanese government for that. Should we not be there? Should we not step up to plate and not just hear the laundry list being repeated over and over again, but actually do something right here right now?

We know the aid groups are leaving. Who is replacing them? The military.

Would the member not see the value, and I think she would agree, of our doing something, not suggesting, but doing something tomorrow and provide at least more aid support to the African Union? For goodness sake we should demand that China and Russia do something. It is not enough to suggest. What does the member think?

[Situation in Sudan, October 3rd, 2006]

Mr. Chair, after the last take note debate on Darfur I talked to experts and I did it this time again. This expert's name is Mayom Bul. The reason he is an expert is because he has had over 20 years experience in Sudan. He is a Sudanese refugee. He wants to know directly from the government why we are not there. I have heard the laundry list. I am sure he is watching and he heard the laundry list of what the government has done.

With due respect, it is not enough because we have the African Union right now crying out for resources. It does not have enough and do we know what the solution is going to be? It is going to be dependent upon the Sudanese government which will then give it the green light to manipulate. It is not good enough for anyone here or for my colleague.

We need to step up. We do not suggest we act. This is difficult, but we need to do that. That is what he is asking for. That is what I am asking for. That is what we need to do. Can we please not suggest? Can we demand? Can we step up to the plate again and provide assistance to the African Union because it needs it desperately?

[Criminal Code, October 2nd, 2006]

Mr. Speaker, the member's speech was balanced. She acknowledged the pain and suffering that occurs among families when someone is killed as a result of street racing, but also she had questions around what would be the remedy for these tragedies and let us be evidenced based.

She identified an area in her community and talked about prevention? Could she comment on that? She talked about some examples in terms of drunken driving. As well, could she comment on the requirements of the police services? There are laws on the books and sometimes it is a matter of not having the people, the person power, to enforce the laws.

[Criminal Code, October 2nd, 2006]

Mr. Speaker, at committee, I know the member looks at how legislation has or has not been enacted. He certainly comes from a background where he can see the unintended consequences perhaps of any legislation.

The member described some of the concerns he had about how the bill might be interpreted. Beyond what the government perceives the bill as being, which is something that will deal with the concerns around street racing, does the member see another way of dealing with it? We have talked about prevention, and that is fine. Are there other mechanisms that he can see available to us as legislators to confront the whole issue of street racing? I am sure he has pondered some ideas, and I am interested in hearing some.

[Criminal Code, October 2nd, 2006]

Mr. Speaker, I have some concerns about the bill, one being how we deal with things in an evidence-based manner, that is, proving and showing to us as legislators that this is the way to deal with this problem exclusively. If not, what are some of the other things that can be done?

Some of the debate today has been around the fact that we have not looked at the full scope of how to attack the problem of street racing. I mentioned my concern about advertising, which is a concern shared by some of my colleagues. What are we doing vis-à-vis advertising? The response I received to that question was that we could not legislate what goes into Hollywood movies. I simply was pointing to the fact that some of the movies glorify street racing and that is something we should probably address. We cannot ban or censor movies but we can acknowledge the fact that they are a factor in street racing.

Something we can do and something that should be looked at is regulating advertising. We do have standards for advertising and we should look at those standards. As a member who is concerned about this issue, I would like to know what the member's feelings are about prevention. What can we do beyond this bill? I think most people would acknowledge that a law does not change behaviour in and of itself. We know other things can be done.

What is the role of those who change cars from being regular vehicles that take us from a to b to being street racing cars? This might be an underground business but we know we can find places that will soup up a car in an afternoon. How do we deal with this kind of thing? Is there something we can do as legislators in that area?

[Criminal Code, October 2nd, 2006]

Mr. Speaker, I had a couple of questions I wanted to ask my colleague concerning the area of prevention we have talked about, but also about the deterrent effects. If we are looking at this to deter, and I am assuming that is part of the rationale for this bill, where is the evidence for that? I guess it is important when we are dealing with bills of this scope that we be evidence-based. Where is the deterrence evidence that we can cite and prove because that is obviously important? That is my first question.

My second question would be, what other areas can we look at in terms of prevention? If we were to look at how street racing is being promoted in Hollywood, on our televisions, and the idea that one can pick up a magazine and have a car overhauled in an afternoon, perhaps while parents are away, et cetera, and we have heard these stories, where is the government on those issues? Many would say that is where we should start. This bill is probably not the first issue that we need to deal with. The first issue is actually the prevention, supply, demand, so to say, of street racing cars, et cetera.

[Criminal Code, October 2nd, 2006]

Mr. Speaker, one thing my friend from the Maritimes talked about, and certainly my colleague from Windsor--Tecumseh mentioned it, is the idea of prevention. One would submit that the best way to deal with a concern like street racing would be to prevent it. We see a possible law in front of us now that does not seem to balance that equation very well.

My friend from Windsor talked about the way the whole car industry promotes fast cars. We just need to think of some of the commercials we see on a daily basis, where we see the industry's appetite for promoting unsafe driving.

There are other things we can do. I think of the examples that we have seen with respect to impaired driving. There are laws to deal with this, but really, if we talk to people, they will tell us that education and prevention have changed the outcome. I would like to hear my colleague's comments on the whole idea of prevention and where it fits in this equation.

[Petitions, October 2nd, 2006]

Mr. Speaker, it is my pleasure to present a petition on behalf of citizens calling on this place to defend and ensure that we never have the situation that we saw in Rwanda, and to ensure that genocide is something that we in fact make our cause and commit to ensuring it never happens again.

Never again.

[The Environment, October 2nd, 2006]

Mr. Speaker, I might agree. The Liberal climate change scandal makes the Liberal sponsorship scandal look like stolen lunch money.

The government has no reason for not having a comprehensive, open and accountable plan to get taxpayers' money back. Will the President of the Treasury Board bring in the Auditor General to find out where the climate change money went? Or does this government believe, like the last government, that fighting climate change is a writeoff?

[The Environment, October 2nd, 2006]

Mr. Speaker, the environment commissioner has documented the massive failure of the former Liberal government on climate change: $6 billion in climate change programs with no effective government-wide system to track expenditures, no performance standards and no results.

My question is for the President of the Treasury Board. What effort is the government making to track the missing money? When is the government going to get Canadians' hard-earned money back and put it where it belongs, in cleaning and greening this environment?