Rick Norlock

[Canadian Heritage, October 28th, 2010]

Mr. Speaker, it is indeed a pleasure to inform the House that my private member's bill, Bill C-465, An Act respecting a National Hunting, Trapping and Fishing Heritage Day has been approved by the Standing Committee on Canadian Heritage and sent back to this House for third reading.

Hunting, trapping and fishing are some of the oldest practices in Canadian society. For the first nations, the coureurs de bois and the Inuit peoples of the north, hunting, trapping and fishing have played a vital role in the sustainability of past and present communities.

I would also like to thank my hon. colleagues from across the aisle who supported this bill at committee. Their support and contribution have improved this bill's overall scope and clarity.

I would also encourage all of my hon. colleagues to support this bill at third reading, so that we may have a day to honour those who have contributed so greatly to our society, history, economy and conservation efforts.

[Business of Supply, October 21st, 2010]

Mr. Speaker, on a daily basis I see the members of Parliament from Quebec in our party working tirelessly to ensure that the province of Quebec and in particular the people they represent get their fair share of government programs, whether it be through Canada's economic action plan or whether it is to ensure that we make sure there is fairness in equalization.

I know the parliamentary secretary has taken great pains to go to every member of this House. As a matter of fact, I know he has travelled across this country consulting with Canadians to make sure that this government delivers what Canadians need and want.

I wonder if the parliamentary secretary would comment on the actions not only of our members from the province of Quebec, but others in Canada who have wanted to make sure this federation gets stronger with every single Canadian in this great country of ours.

[Automotive Industry, October 19th, 2010]

Mr. Speaker, while the opposition members continue to play their partisan games, our government continues to deliver on Canada's economic action plan which is creating jobs right across this great country. While the recovery is still fragile, we are seeing signs of life.

Will the Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Industry please update the House on the great news that was just announced in Oshawa today?

[Sustaining Canada's Economic Recovery Act, October 8th, 2010]

Mr. Speaker, I know that every single member in this House cares about our veterans, but what I take great exception to is the politicization of it.

The member needs to know, as my friend from the riding of Peterborough mentioned, that they actually took World War II veterans off the veterans list. What she did not mention was that the defence minister, the chief of defence staff, received an award last year from the Mental Health Commission of Canada, because of the work we have done on post-traumatic stress disorder. What she left out was the fact that the previous Liberal government cancelled a helicopter contract, costing the Canadian taxpayers over half a billion dollars, and we got nothing for that. Now we have to go out and buy those aircraft at almost double the cost.

She refers to agent orange, which her government never did anything about. At least we did something about it, so I implore every member of this House, specifically that member, to stop politicizing our veterans and work with us to make their cause better.

[Canadian Forces, October 8th, 2010]

Mr. Speaker, there is a disturbing video running on the Internet. It calls our Canadian military “canon fodder”. This video has outraged Canadian military families, particularly those who have lost sons and daughters. They have considered it an insult and disrespectful of the careers chosen by their children.

Would the Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of National Defence tell us what he thinks of this video?

[Employment Insurance, October 1st, 2010]

Mr. Speaker, we have heard a lot of concern about the Bloc-NDP-Liberal proposal to create a 45-day work year. This plan would cost Canadians $7 billion annually and increase premiums permanently by a whopping 35%. This is irresponsible and downright offensive to hard-working Canadians. Our Conservative government is the only voice in Parliament to oppose this reckless plan.

Would the parliamentary secretary inform the House how the government is helping support jobs and standing up for job creators?

[National Hunting, Trapping and Fishing Heritage Day Act, June 16th, 2010]

Madam Speaker, I want to thank all of the members who rose today and those who rose in the first hour of debate in support of this bill.

This evening we heard some personal anecdotes of a family nature from the member for Moncton—Riverview—Dieppe. I share those anecdotes. He talked about hunting with his father. He talked about a man who was important to him and his family, a man who was important to all Canadians and to anyone who enjoys fishing. I am referring of course to Mr. Taylor, who is advocating for Atlantic salmon. I too have advocated for the reintroduction of Atlantic salmon into Lake Ontario. A Coburn Creek settler said that at one time, one could walk across the creek on the backs of the salmon when they were spawning. They were Atlantic salmon, which were replaced with Pacific salmon.

We heard from a member from northern Ontario just a few minutes ago with regard to some of her perceptions about the changes to the environmental protection act and certain other things. I do not necessarily agree with her but I will take her kick in the pants along with her support for this bill. She needs to know that I was born in her riding and for a short time was raised in the White River area of her riding. My recently deceased uncle trapped in the White River area. That hunting, trapping and fishing heritage is of a very personal nature to me.

I spent many years hunting and fishing with my late father just up the Ottawa Valley in Renfrew. The member for Moncton—Riverview—Dieppe mentioned his association with the great outdoors and the great times he had with his father. It means a lot to me. If I talk much more about it my voice will break as his did.

This means a lot to every Canadian. Whether they are new Canadians or not, people need to know that this heritage of ours began when our first nations crossed the Bering Strait into Canada. They had an abundant availability of fish and wildlife. Fur provided a means of clothing themselves. If it were not for them, we would not be the country that we are today.

This bill just does one thing: it recognizes in a significant way that hunting, fishing and trapping are more than just sports. They are more than just a way to earn a living. These activities actually go to the very core of what it means to be a Canadian in the true sense. It means that we incorporate God's great gifts of fish, wildlife, this great environment of ours, how we enjoy it and how we incorporate it not only into our lives but into the very culture of our country, the very culture of our families. These things bring families together.

The member for Prince Edward—Hastings talked about his first experiences with fishing and his experiences now with his grandchildren. I too have experienced the great outdoors with my grandchildren, who happen to live in northern Ontario and in western Canada. After I leave this place I hope that I will be able to continue to enjoy the great outdoors with my grandchildren, as my father did with me, and his father did with him. Every member who has risen to speak on this subject has related the same familial story, that hunting, fishing and trapping is a culture in this country, whether one is an aboriginal, a new Canadian or an older Canadian.

I want to thank those members who have risen in support of this bill. I look forward to working with them to make it an even better bill as time goes on.

[Eliminating Pardons for Serious Crimes Act, June 7th, 2010]

Madam Speaker, quite simply it is typical of the member. We have served on committee for the last four and a half years.

We could begin to raise each specific instance and say this is good but that is bad, we need to change this and we need to change that. We will never have a perfect Criminal Code. We will never have a perfect bill of any kind, but I believe that the National Parole Board will take into account those instances where people are deserving of a record suspension.

Once again I say, pass Bill C-23 and I believe that we will address more properly the feelings of Canadians vis-à-vis record suspension.

[Eliminating Pardons for Serious Crimes Act, June 7th, 2010]

Madam Speaker, to me, the question quite simply is, is Bill C-23 a good piece of legislation?

Once again we are seeing where the opposition wants to have a piece of legislation and it is really not necessary. I simply say that this legislation does not have anything in it that would be contrary, I believe, to the average citizen's sense of propriety. It actually addresses some of the issues we are faced with as a society, one of which, as the member who questioned me stated, takes into account the Karla Homolka situation. It takes into account many other situations. We could research and bring up any number of people who are beginning to be eligible for a so-called pardon that we want to change to a record suspension which I think addresses the fundamental issue better.

Therefore, why not pass Bill C-23? There is nothing in it that would make the average citizen in our society feel it is inappropriate. That is why I say to the member that we do not need to approach this in a piecemeal fashion. We do not need to chunk things up, to box them up or to repackage them. Bill C-23 is a good piece of legislation. Before the House rises for the summer constituency period, we could deal with that and we could pass it unanimously.

I am all for that and I believe the government is all for that. Let us just do it. I agree.

[Eliminating Pardons for Serious Crimes Act, June 7th, 2010]

Madam Speaker, I thank my hon. friend who posed that very interesting question. I would pose the question back. We can do both today, or very soon. We can pass the government's legislative agenda, this particular bill, Bill C-23, which would accommodate the very thing that she and her party want. So, when it comes to co-operation, of course, we are prepared to do that. Let us pass Bill C-23.

That is just what I and the parliamentary secretary have asked. Let us pass the legislation. It is good legislation. It is timely legislation. It is, as I have previously stated before I stood to answer this question, the talk at the coffee shops around this country. It is the talk that I hear from citizens not only in coffee shops but when I meet them at various functions, that the current legislation does not work as effectively as it should work and that our system of public safety needs to be improved. That is what Bill C-23 would do.

So, yes, I agree with her. We could make this bill go through the House very quickly with the co-operation of the official opposition. However, I hasten to remind her that much of the public safety legislation in this House has been held up in the very places and at times where it should have been put forward.

So, yes, we can deal with this very expeditiously in this place. Bill C-23 could receive unanimous support and we could that enacted in a timely fashion that would facilitate the very thing that the member's question poses, the very thing of keeping people from having a pardon when they should not and offending the very core of our sense of propriety in this country.

So, let us just get behind Bill C-23 and pass it unanimously. I agree.