Randall Garrison

[Justice, October 6th, 2011]

Mr. Speaker, the government knows full well it is intervening in the case, not standing back from the case. The government claims it does not want to reopen the same-sex marriage debate, but that is exactly what it is doing by disputing the definition of a civil partnership. Conservatives are saying straight couples who move to Canada have more rights than same-sex couples.

Will the minister agree to respect gay and lesbian rights and stop opposing full legal recognition of same-sex marriages and civil unions from other jurisdictions?

[Justice, October 6th, 2011]

Mr. Speaker, in 2005 Canada made the historic decision to allow same-sex marriage. Unfortunately, the Conservatives are now trying to erode this right by intervening in an Ontario case to oppose recognition of a same-sex civil partnership from the U.K.

The Ontario government has agreed to recognize this partnership under Canadian law, but the Conservative government is opposing the guarantee of full protection of the law to this couple under the Divorce Act.

Why is the Minister of Justice intervening in this case to deny equal protection of the law for all same-sex couples?

[Royal Canadian Mounted Police, October 4th, 2011]

Mr. Speaker, the government cannot seem to get its story straight on this file. First the minister says there is a deadline and no more negotiations. Then on Friday, the member for Port Moody—Westwood—Port Coquitlam, speaking as the cabinet minister in B.C., told B.C. municipalities he was sure the government would strike a deal on the new RCMP contract.

Which is it? Are the government members going to meet and negotiate, or are they going to complain that no one has told them what the issues are?

Will the Conservatives stop trying to play good cop, bad cop and sit down and negotiate seriously with British Columbia so that front-line RCMP officers can focus on their real work, which is keeping our communities safe?

[Senate Reform Act, October 3rd, 2011]

Mr. Speaker, does the hon. member seriously think his constituents would like the idea of adding 105 politicians to our system if we did not already have a Senate now? Would they really think it would solve their problems? Would they think that spending $109 million or $107 million a year would actually do anything to solve the problems they are worried about in their daily lives? I do not think so.

The second part of my question in on accountability. In a nine-year term where people are not re-elected, how is there any accountability for that person at all in the system being proposed?

[Senate Reform Act, October 3rd, 2011]

Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank the member for Nanaimo—Cowichan for her excellent speech on this topic and especially for her emphasis on consulting Canadians. It is fairly clear the government on the other side has consulted neither Canadians nor the provinces.

Let us imagine a Canada that did not have a Senate. What does my colleague think the public's reaction would be if we went to them and said, “Let's have an extra 105 politicians, have them stay there for nine years without being voted on again and let's spend $100 million a year?” We could ask if the public would think this would actually help solve the problems we face as a country. I would be interested to hear what the member thinks the public would think about this, if we did not have a Senate and if someone came forward to suggest we needed one.

[Senate Reform Act, October 3rd, 2011]

Mr. Speaker, I was wondering whether the hon. member has considered the question of costs. Time and again we see Conservative proposals presented in this chamber with no costing. Could she comment on the more than $100 million the Senate costs us every year?

In addition, what about costs for holding those election campaigns? On this side we question the value of a second house. The House of Commons is elected and does a very good job doing the public's business. Do we need to spend several hundred million dollars more on a second chamber?

Could the member comment on what costs would be associated with the bill?

[Points of Order, September 29th, 2011]

Mr. Speaker, in a statement delivered today by the member for South Surrey—White Rock—Cloverdale, I was accused, along with the member for Surrey North, of supporting child molesters.

As an adult survivor of child abuse, I rise on this point of order and demand an immediate withdrawal by the member and to ask the Speaker to review the statement.

[Public Safety, September 29th, 2011]

Mr. Speaker, all British Columbians are asking for is a fair deal on policing, one with more community input and better accountability. Instead, they are being offered ultimatums again today and a dangerously out-of-touch approach of one size fits all provinces.

While the government insults its opponents with cheap shots and threatens the Government of British Columbia, will the minister instead commit to negotiate in good faith and will the minister commit to stay at the table until a fair deal is reached?

[Royal Canadian Mounted Police, September 28th, 2011]

Mr. Speaker, the government likes to talk tough on crime, but when it comes to front-line police, it continues to fall down on the job. It is telling the government in British Columbia to take it or leave it on the contract offer.

British Columbians need to know that the result of these negotiations will not be a threat to the safety of their communities. Will the minister stand in the House right now and commit that the RCMP is staying put in British Columbia? Will the government stop playing fast and loose with the safety of British Columbians in these negotiations by telling British Columbia to take it or leave it?

[Salmon Restoration Society, September 28th, 2011]

Mr. Speaker, the Juan de Fuca Salmon Restoration Society is a group of extremely dedicated volunteers working in the area from the Sooke Basin to the San Juan River in my riding. Twelve creeks and rivers stand to benefit from their work in rehabilitating and restoring the all-important salmon habitat.

The Salmon Restoration Society and wild salmon advocates like Alexandra Morton have been working hard to protect Pacific salmon habit so that local streams will once again produce the salmon that are so important for first nations, sport fishing, recreation and tourism.

The Salmon Restoration Society is a very successful partnership of community volunteers, small businesses, local government, Royal Roads University and the T'Sou-ke and Pacheedaht First Nations.

On September 25, the society opened its Charters Creek Salmon Habitat Restoration and Interpretive Centre.

I would like to congratulate the dedicated volunteers and also those who donated equipment and supplies in order to help restore salmon habitat on the west coast of Vancouver Island in my riding.