Ralph Goodale

[Public Safety, September 17th, 2018]

Mr. Speaker, online sexual exploitation is an absolutely horrific crime. We are fighting it on many fronts. For example, we are investing $4.1 million in the Canadian Centre for Child Protection to help identify victims, improve support services, and develop high-tech tools to shut criminals down. A further $19 million is strengthening the RCMP's National Child Exploitation Coordination Centre, and we are working through the G7, the Five Eyes and Internet service providers to get dangerous offensive material off the Internet as rapidly as possible and keep it from going on in the first place.

[Questions on the Order Paper, June 20th, 2018]

Mr. Speaker, on May 22, 2018, the Minister of Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness said in the House of Commons, “I would note that under the Harper government some 60 terrorist travellers returned to Canada. Not one was charged.”

Prior to November 4, 2015, no criminal charges were brought against any individual who returned to Canada after participating in terrorist activity.

Charges laid against Awso Peshdary were for actions taken on Canadian soil. John Maguire and Khadar Khalib were charged in absentia.

[Public Safety, June 19th, 2018]

Mr. Speaker, Canada is a safe country, but over the past five years, indeed gun gang violence has been increasing. We are committed to combatting these trends and making our communities safer through a package of common sense measures.

Bill C-71 is one of those. It will enact measures to better protect Canadian communities from gun violence. Today, we released a report on the recent summit on guns and gangs. This report will help determine how best to allocate some $327 million to tackle gun-related violence and gang activities in Canada.

[Natural Resources, June 19th, 2018]

Mr. Speaker, Canadians have their full democratic right to express their point of view through protest and dissent. That is enshrined in Canadian law and it is protected by the Canadian Constitution. They must however express their points of view fully within the context of law and taking into account the public safety of others.

The laws to protect public safety will be duly enforced, as they should be.

[Public Safety, June 19th, 2018]

Mr. Speaker, the comments made by the hon. member seem to be drawn from various media reports. It is always open to members of Parliament to read the press and to draw their own conclusions from what is reported in the media. In order to deal with a case in court, there has to be an investigation by the police force, the collection of evidence, the laying of charges, and prosecution through the criminal justice system.

That is what we are trying to do, while those members read the press.

[Public Safety, June 19th, 2018]

Mr. Speaker, we use a full suite of measures to deal with these situations: surveillance, investigations, interviews, criminal charges, prosecutions wherever the evidence prevails, peace bonds, Criminal Code listings, no-fly listings, and hoisting of passports. There are threat reduction measures, as appropriate, under the CSIS Act.

The determination of which of the tools are appropriate is left to the professionals in our police and security agencies. They are best positioned to make the judgment calls.

[Public Safety, June 19th, 2018]

Mr. Speaker, our priority in dealing with these situations is to prosecute, to the full extent of the law, as soon as the evidence is available.

I would point out that the public record shows that under the previous government terror charges were laid against four individuals in absentia, after they had left Canada, but no charges were laid against any of the 60-some terrorist travellers who returned to Canada, under the previous government.

Since 2016, four charges have been laid against the returnees, two have been convicted, and two others are in the process of prosecution.

[Firearms Act, June 19th, 2018]

Madam Speaker, let me repeat that we have worked very hard to try to ensure that this legislation gets ample time in committee and in the House, and I believe that, on balance, we have achieved that.

In terms of the substance of his question at the end of whether this will contribute to public safety, yes, I believe it will, in a number of ways, for example in improving background checks. I might say that on that topic, there appears to be almost universal support on both sides of the chamber. The idea of background checks, as I think he would remember, was raised in the House a long time ago by James Moore, who was a Conservative member of Parliament. He made a very strong case for enhancing background checks, and now we are doing, in effect, what Mr. Moore, the former Conservative MP, proposed.

By enhancing background checks, we will collectively, as a society, do a better job of keeping firearms out of the hands of people who have a reputation for violence, have criminal records, or are otherwise considered to be a danger to society, including threatening behaviour on the Internet. Again, I would note that as a result of amendments proposed in the standing committee, the provisions around background checks have, in fact, been enhanced and strengthened. One of the critical elements in protecting society is to make sure background checks work. The—

[Firearms Act, June 19th, 2018]

Madam Speaker, what the member has to take into account in determining whether time allocation is appropriate in any set of circumstances is in fact how much time is being allotted to the consideration of the measure before the House. In this case, at second reading, there were six full hours of debate. In the committee, there were five full meetings to receive evidence and hear witnesses, and 26 witnesses appeared in the process of those hearings. Then there were three more meetings to deal with clause-by-clause, and that brings us to this point.

There were several hours of debate last night at report stage. Going forward, there will be five more hours at report stage, and after that, five more hours to deal with third reading. Altogether, that gives ample time for consideration.

When we compare those numbers to a lot of other pieces of legislation that go through Parliament, it is obvious that this topic is getting a very thorough airing.

[Firearms Act, June 19th, 2018]

Madam Speaker, the purpose of this legislation is to keep Canadians safe; to add, in a measurable way, to public safety; to assist the police in pursuing guns that are involved in a crime or crimes that involve guns; and to make sure that, in the process of doing that, we are treating law-abiding gun owners across the country in a fair and reasonable manner.

The legislation involves strengthening background checks, improving the process for licence verification, requiring standard business record-keeping across the country, making sure that classifications are done in a professional and consistent manner, and ensuring that unusual movements of restricted and prohibited weapons require a transportation authorization. Those measures, taken together, will make an important contribution to public safety.

We have the endorsement of the Canadian Association of Chiefs of Police and police forces across the country. We also have comments from a number of people representing fishing and gaming organizations. They, too, see the proposed legislation, although not unanimously, as reasonable measures.

We have tried to strike here a reasonable balance that is fair and effective for all concerned.