House of Commons photoWon his last election, in 2011, with 43% of the vote.
Fair Rail Freight Service Act May 23rd, 2013
Mr. Speaker, I thank my hon. colleague for his very heartfelt speech, as always.
Why, in his opinion, are the Conservatives defending businesses that abuse their market power? Why are they abandoning the regions? Why are they not standing up for farmers as well as mining and forestry communities in Quebec and Canada?
Fair Rail Freight Service Act May 23rd, 2013
Mr. Speaker, I want to thank my Liberal colleague for his speech. I want to know whether he realizes that, by selling CN at a low price in 1995, the Liberals of Canada made matters worse for shippers and set the stage for a monopoly. They missed the opportunity to create a competitive environment by ensuring that the rail transportation system remained public. Does the member realize that by selling CN at a low price, the Liberals sold Canada's soul?
An Act to Bring Fairness for the Victims of Violent Offenders May 10th, 2013
Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to speak to Bill C-479, introduced by the member opposite. The NDP stands behind initiatives that promote fairness for victims of crime, as well as their families and their communities, which are often collateral victims.
We will study this bill at length in committee to ensure that it meets their needs.
This bill amends Part II of the Corrections and Conditional Release Act. Bill C-479 seems to respond to some of the recommendations that the Federal Ombudsman for Victims of Crime made in 2010.
In her report, the ombudsman suggests that we adopt some of the principles set out in the Youth Criminal Justice Act. The Declaration of Principle in the YCJA states that:
3(1)(d)(ii) victims should be treated with courtesy, compassion and respect for their dignity and privacy and should suffer the minimum degree of inconvenience as a result of their involvement with the youth criminal justice system,
(iii) victims should be provided with information about the proceedings and given an opportunity to participate and be heard,
The ombudsman found that the Corrections and Conditional Release Act must reflect the same principles. It remains to be seen, during our study in committee, whether Bill C-479 makes this law consistent with these principles in an effective and balanced manner.
The Corrections and Conditional Release Act was enacted in 1992. It was the first federal statute governing corrections and conditional release that officially recognized the victims. Bill C-479 seems to respond to two things the ombudsman considered.
I would like to address the first aspect of the question. In her report, the ombudsman pointed out that victims do not automatically receive information on offenders during the release process. In order to access that information, victims have to figure out for themselves how to get the information and how to register with the National Parole Board. Just imagine how very difficult it must be for a victim who has been severely traumatized to navigate through this red tape.
The ombudsman indicated that the registered victim-to-offender ratio is still quite low. There are over 20,000 offenders currently in federal custody, approximately 70% of which are serving sentences for violent crimes. Yet just over 6,000 victims are registered to receive information on fewer than 4,000 offenders.
It is impossible to determine whether the victims who are not registered chose not to be or whether they were simply unaware of their rights. Representatives from the parole system and the ombudsman think one of the primary obstacles of getting victims to sign up is that there is a lack of information.
The National Parole Board should take the initiative to give them this information and should automatically communicate with victims to inform them of their right to receive information. The proposed amendment in Bill C-479 would make it mandatory to provide transcripts of a parole review hearing to victims and members of their family and the offenders, and to provide victims with the information under consideration by the board during the offender's review.
I would like to talk about the second important aspect. In her report, the ombudsman pointed out that we must take the concerns of victims into account during decisions pertaining to the release and supervision of an offender.
Many victims have expressed concerns about an offender being released on parole when they live in the area. In some cases, this fear prevents victims from asking for information because they fear reprisals should the offender become aware that the victim is interested in the case.
Furthermore, according to the ombudsman, victims want to know that the information they provide will be considered. In light of that, Bill C-479 is designed to make it easier for victims or their family members to attend parole review hearings and for their statements to be taken into consideration in decisions regarding the offender's release.
The amendment to the act would also ensure that victims are informed if an offender is to be released on temporary absence, parole or statutory release.
Bill C-479 would also allow for the cancellation of a parole review hearing if an offender has repeatedly refused to attend, or waived his or her right to attend, previous hearings.
We are sensitive to victims' concerns. We will examine Bill C-479 carefully to ensure that it addresses the demands made by the ombudsman for victims of crime.
However, we have some concerns. First, we want to ensure that the bill does not in any way violate the Charter of Rights and Freedoms.
Can my colleague opposite confirm that he has done his homework and that he has verified that Bill C-479 complies with the charter and the Constitution?
Second, Bill C-479 should have been a government bill. I wonder why the Conservatives are using a private member's bill to push the government's agenda, which has always been focused on victims' rights.
Why did the Minister of Justice not introduce Bill C-479 himself? Why did the member for Ancaster—Dundas—Flamborough—Westdale take up this cause?
Third, private members' bills must assess and cost the changes they propose. They must assess the impact on the provinces and territories, especially with respect to parole boards. They must also provide proper compensation, if required.
Did my colleague opposite consult the provinces when drafting this bill? Can he tell what the bill will cost? Which level of government will pay these additional costs?
In closing, if our concerns are addressed in committee, and if there is clear proof that the bill respects the victim and judicial independence, I will be pleased to throw my full support behind this bill.
For that reason, we support the bill at second reading and its referral to committee for more in-depth study.
Nuclear Terrorism Act May 10th, 2013
Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague for his very thoughtful speech on Bill S-9.
Why does he think the government waited so long? The government was in power for over five years before this issue became a priority for it.
I have some suggestions. Is it because this government has a hidden political agenda, and standing up for the needs of all Canadians is just not a priority?
Nuclear Terrorism Act May 10th, 2013
Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank the hon. member for that very relevant question.
Prevention is indeed very important in this and many other areas. When it comes to crime, it is very important. Prevention as well as securing sites and storing nuclear materials are all very important when it comes to countering nuclear terrorism.
Prevention is also very important when it comes to environmental issues. It is a must and it pays off in the long term, since it prevents many future problems.
Nuclear Terrorism Act May 10th, 2013
Mr. Speaker, first, I think it unfortunate that the nuclear terrorism bill has come from the Senate, a chamber where the occupants have not been democratically elected, but, rather, appointed for partisan reasons. Bills should be debated first and foremost in the House of Commons, where the elected representatives sit. That is the very principle of a parliamentary system.
The government was already beating all records for time allocation and closure. Now it is bringing its bills in by the back door, by way of the Senate. It is really sad.
Let us discuss Bill S-9, which will enable Canada to fulfill its commitments under two international conventions. These conventions are intended to go beyond the limits of nuclear non-proliferation and will now include protective measures for nuclear facilities. Bill S-9 would reinforce Canada's obligation under the 2004 UN Security Council Resolution 1540 to take and enforce effective measures to prevent the proliferation of nuclear materials as well as chemical and biological weapons.
According to Matthew Bunn, associate professor of public policy at Harvard University, there have been a number of cases of trafficking in since the 1990s. For example, there have been 20 seizures of highly enriched uranium since 1992. There is also a black market for less radioactive materials. The International Atomic Energy Agency, or IAEA, has reported nearly 2,000 incidents of unauthorized use, transport, and possession of nuclear and other radioactive material between 1993 and 2011.
We must remain watchful and aware of the danger. Canada is one of the world's major producers and exporters of uranium. That means we must stockpile a great deal of radioactive and nuclear waste. That is an enormous problem, especially with the lax enforcement of regulations and prevention seen in the field. It is very difficult to contain this kind of waste. When a potential black market in radioactive material is added to this problem, we must see that the potential for nuclear terrorism is right here in Canada, under our noses.
My hon. colleague the member for Manicouagan told a story the other day here about L. Bélanger Métal, a large scrapyard in Trois-Rivières, that detected a very high level of radiation in certain metal beams it had received in 2012. Tests were done and they were able to determine that the metal came from Gentilly. How did this radioactive metal end up there? It is a very disturbing situation that shows how far-reaching the problem is. The greatest nuclear terrorism threat lies in the waste from Canada's nuclear reactors, which are unprotected from theft or simple negligence.
Nuclear terrorism does not occur in isolation but has an impact on the entire world. New Democrats agree that we must co-operate with our international partners. Historically, Canada has always had a reputation as an international leader. It is sad to see that our reputation has been quite tarnished since 2006, for example, with the new environmental policies. If we want to be serious about preventing nuclear terrorism, the first thing is to strengthen our procedures governing environmental assessment and the way we stockpile nuclear waste.
Still, I hope that Bill S-9 will help build Canada's credibility in the fight against nuclear terrorism. I also hope that, when they see us implementing this legislation here, our international partners will be inspired to follow suit.
The Senate committee provided many interesting comments during the long process the bill went through. First, with the development of new technologies, Canada will no longer need to use nuclear reactors and enriched uranium to produce medical isotopes.
The committee also believes that Canada should be a leader in nuclear safety, by committing to stop the use of highly enriched uranium for civilian purposes as soon as possible.
Second, Canada must show greater care in its safety arrangements. Malicious people are always looking for ways to bypass existing safety features. As a result, we must remain vigilant and move to new methods focused on prevention rather than repression.
Another issue was raised during consideration of the bill. The justice department's intention was to stick as closely as possible to the provisions of the international convention. However, some of the new offences in the Criminal Code have a broader scope than the offences found in the international agreements. We must ensure that the overly broad scope of these new sections will not lead to excessive criminalization and will not violate the charters of rights.
Lastly, Canada is legally bound by these international conventions, which means that we have obligations to fulfill. However, we cannot ratify the conventions until the domestic implementation process is complete. That is why I support Bill S-9, while hoping that it will not turn out to be just something passed to court votes.
We need to do more in terms of securing sites, creating protocols and implementing storage solutions that will not become a burden for future generations.
Nuclear Terrorism Act May 10th, 2013
Mr. Speaker, I thank the member for Trois-Rivières for his very compelling speech.
I agree with him about the government's credibility, as it has clearly grown complacent on that front and rarely chooses to be a part of the global community.
My colleague spoke not only of international obligations, but also of the need to honour national charters.
I would like the member for Trois-Rivières to explain why it is important for us to do so.
Nuclear Terrorism Act May 10th, 2013
Mr. Speaker, I congratulate my hon. colleague on his heartfelt speech. I would like to ask him why the manufacture of nuclear or radioactive devices was not included in Bill S-9 when it was introduced in the Senate, since this eventually led to the Senate amendment. This speaks volumes about the lack of prudence and preparation on the government's part.
I wonder if my colleague could elaborate on this lack of prudence and preparation.
Nuclear Terrorism Act May 10th, 2013
Mr. Speaker, thank you for the wonderful speech.
Why does the party opposite have the terrible habit of using the Senate—which is full of unelected members—to launch the legislative process?
World Red Cross and Red Crescent Day May 8th, 2013
Mr. Speaker, this is World Red Cross and Red Crescent Day, a day that emphasizes the mutual understanding among communities around the world and the humanitarian causes served by these renowned organizations.
Today, let us think of the millions of people around the world suffering the effects of war and malnutrition and the disastrous impact of climate change.
Without the support of these organizations, many of them would not have shelter, food or health care. Quite often, the Red Cross and Red Crescent are the only organizations allowed to bring aid into disaster areas.
I ask this House to join me in congratulating the millions of Red Cross and Red Crescent volunteers who make admirable efforts to help communities in need. Let us also commemorate this day to raise awareness of their cause.