Randall Garrison

[Common Sense Firearms Licensing Act, April 1st, 2015]

Mr. Speaker, what we heard from the minister was very disingenuous when he talked about what if all 307 of us spoke. What we are talking about is the government limiting the debate not to 300, but only two members having spoken. He talked again about committees being masters of their own house. We know that the Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness speaks for the minister in the House. That is her job. Unfortunately, when she comes to committee, she does the same thing and speaks for the minister.

The initial proposal from the parliamentary secretary was that we only have three meetings and only 18 witnesses. It was only because the NDP conducted a filibuster under the rules did we force the government to allow more witnesses. We only heard 48 of the more than 100 people who wanted to appear.

I want to go back to my question. This bill had been taken off the order paper, suddenly it appeared back on the order paper, and now suddenly we have time allocation. The minister evaded my question. Is this part of a deal he struck with the National Firearms Association to get it to drop out of presenting witnesses on Bill C-51 and to not criticize Bill C-51, which he knows very well it was going to do.

[Common Sense Firearms Licensing Act, April 1st, 2015]

Mr. Speaker, I have heard this speech before about going to committee and hearing from everyone who wants to appear. That was on Bill C-51. We saw what happened with that.

There is a peculiar thing about this bill. The government rushed in here with this bill, and then we had a sudden delay. Suddenly it was not on the order paper. I wondered if perhaps the minister was actually listening to some of the critics of this bill out there. Then a peculiar thing happened, and I want to ask the minister a very specific question about it. The National Firearms Association was supposed to appear before the public safety committee on Bill C-51. It was going to appear to speak against that bill. Suddenly, at the very last hour, it withdrew as a witness.

Is placing this bill back on the order paper and using time allocation part of a deal the minister cut with the National Firearms Association so that it would not testify against Bill C-51, and the minister agreed, therefore, to bring this forward expeditiously, use time allocation, and pass it through the House? If so, it is not a deal I would want to stand up and talk about.

[Public Safety, April 1st, 2015]

Mr. Speaker, this is more hot air for the minister. If only he cared as much about other public safety issues.

The Canada Border Services Agency desperately needs a new lab to test potentially dangerous items that are coming into Canada. The Conservatives have been warned since 2006 that the 40-year-old lab is not up to modern standards, but instead of taking action the minister has failed to improve facilities while cutting the CBSA budget. Is this how the minister plans to keep Canadians safe?

[Public Safety, April 1st, 2015]

Mr. Speaker, with all this chaff, one thing is really clear: the minister just cannot admit he was wrong about Bill C-51. Despite over 90% of witnesses calling for significant changes, yesterday in the public safety committee, the Conservatives refused over 100 reasonable amendments. On top of that, the Security Intelligence Review Committee has again been clear in its report on plans and priorities. SIRC says it can only review “a small number of CSIS activities in any given year”. So much for strong oversight.

SIRC understands the limits of its powers. Why does the minister not?

[Public Safety, March 31st, 2015]

Mr. Speaker, this is a government that never passes up a good chance to score cheap political points instead of taking on the hard work necessary to get things done.

When it comes to Bill C-51, the Conservatives are still putting their efforts into ramming this bill through the House instead of listening to Canadians. Now they are refusing to adopt common sense amendments that would address some of the worst elements of this dangerous bill.

Canadians should not be asked to trade away their freedoms because the government cannot admit to its drafting mistakes. Will the minister do the right thing and withdraw Bill C-51?

[Questions Passed as Orders for Returns, March 31st, 2015]

With regard to the Communities at Risk: Security Infrastructure Program, for each fiscal year since 2005-2006 inclusive: (a) how many applications were received; (b) how many applications were successful; (c) what is the overall budget for the program by year; (d) what was the total amount of grants distributed by year; and (e) which organizations received grants, broken down by (i) communities, (ii) amounts, (iii) year?

[Questions on the Order Paper, March 31st, 2015]

With regard to the Countering Violent Extremism Program of the Royal Canadian Mounted Police: (a) on what date did the program become operational; (b) how many full-time equivalent staff are assigned to the program; (c) how many RCMP members have received training through the program; (d) in which municipalities is the program operating; (e) what total budget has been allocated to the program; (f) how many community associations and places of worship have been engaged through the program; (g) which faith communities have been engaged through the program; and (h) what is the planned duration of the program?

[Public Safety, March 30th, 2015]

Mr. Speaker, we are waiting for official reports on both those incidents in October.

It is not just Bill C-51 where the Conservatives are falling short on protecting public safety. Global News investigators have raised questions about whether RCMP officers lacked the tools and training needed to respond to the attack on RCMP members in New Brunswick, which cost three lives.

The RCMP has been forced to reallocate resources and to move 600 officers from organized and financial crimes to respond to national security threats, a situation the RCMP commissioner called unsustainable.

Now the Conservatives are asking the RCMP to do even more, while they cut its budget for a third year in a row. Does the minister think the situation is acceptable?

[Public Safety, March 30th, 2015]

Mr. Speaker, the Conservatives may want to appear like they have been listening when it comes to Bill C-51, but the three weak amendments they have had to bring forward to their own bill do not even come close to dealing with its fundamental flaws.

Bill C-51 is still dangerously vague and overreaching, and it still ignores proven measures that work to combat terrorism.

When Canadians hear that security services are monitoring protesting veterans and disability advocates, they are right to wonder whether it makes any sense to give these agencies wider powers with no new oversight.

Why does the minister continue to insist that more oversight is not needed when it clearly is?

[Canada Post, March 30th, 2015]

Mr. Speaker, Canadians are concerned about the end of door-to-door mail delivery. In my riding alone, Canada Post plans to shift 15,000 households to community mailboxes this year. Most residents find this hard to accept, especially after Canada Post's announcement that it made a profit of nearly $200 million again this year.

In my riding, residents and their municipalities are still struggling to get answers from Canada Post. Who will cover the costs associated with installing these boxes, like lighting and sidewalks? Who will evaluate pedestrian safety and traffic concerns, or will Canada Post just wait for accidents to happen? Who will pick up the tab for litter? Who will clean up the graffiti? Who will compensate those whose property values crash when a box is plopped in front of their house?

I continue to get phone calls, letters, and emails in my constituency office almost every day asking for help, but Canada Post refuses even to host an open house in my riding to answer questions like these.

It is time for the Conservatives to order a halt to this ill-conceived and unnecessary attack on an essential public service and good-paying jobs in our communities. It is time for the Conservative government and its cronies at Canada Post to go.