Roxanne James

[Anti-Terrorism Act, 2015, April 24th, 2015]

Mr. Speaker, it is truly unfortunate, as I sit here today and listen to some of the questions coming from the NDP, that such misinformation about the bill is being pushed out, whether intentional or because of a complete, sheer lack of understanding. I certainly hope it is not intentional. However, during clause-by-clause in committee the very first amendment that was put forward by the NDP critic clearly showed he did not have an idea what the information sharing act was about. The fact that the NDP member stood up today and asked a question somehow connecting it to medical information about an individual case is completely outrageous.

The information sharing act has to do with information pertinent to national security and would allow one agency to relay that information on to the appropriate security agency to take action. It is absolutely crucial. We heard from many credible witnesses, unlike the NDP that brought in witnesses who said the sky was falling. Clearly that did not happen.

I would like to ask my hon. colleague, the Parliamentary Secretary to the Prime Minister, what he thinks is the result of this misinformation that is being pushed out there, either intentionally or because of a lack of understanding, and the implications that could have on national security.

[Anti-Terrorism Act, 2015, April 24th, 2015]

Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank the member for his speech. He also sits with me on the public safety committee.

Throughout his speech, he continued to refer to issues surrounding his failed private member's bill. He asked many of these questions of the witnesses during committee, even though his failed private member's bill and his ideas for oversight were not part of the actual bill itself. In fact, during clause-by-clause, he had to withdraw some of the amendments he had put forward because what he felt was the truth was actually not correct and officials had to correct him.

We have been very clear on this side of the House. We firmly believe that third party, independent, non-political oversight is the best method to ensure that our security agencies can operate without any political interference from very partisan members who are in the House. Let us be clear about that.

It is strange enough that the member likes to compare this particular issue with countries we are similar to, wanting to know why we are not doing it. I should ask him the same question. When comparing us to other countries, why did the Liberal Party vote against standing shoulder to shoulder with our allies in the global fight against jihadist terrorism and joining the air strikes and coalition against ISIL?

That is the question I would like to ask the member. Why does he not use that same philosophy on issues that actually matter to Canadians?

[Public Safety, April 24th, 2015]

Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank the member for the Yukon for his work in public safety.

We are very disappointed with this decision, and I am here to say that we will appeal. Omar Ahmed Khadr pleaded guilty to heinous crimes, including the murder of American army medic Sergeant Christopher Speer. We have vigorously defended against any attempt to lessen his punishment for these crimes.

While the Liberals refuse to rule out special compensation for this convicted terrorist, and the NDP actively tries to force Canadian taxpayers to compensate him, we believe that victims of crime, not the perpetrators, are the ones who deserve full compensation.

[Canada-U.S. Border Security, April 24th, 2015]

Mr. Speaker, our government is focused on ensuring that our shared border is secure, while easing the flow of legitimate travel and trade. We are investing in border infrastructure to support this objective, including new lanes at the busiest crossings.

The port of entry that the member is speaking about has fewer than 10 travellers who pass during non-peak hours. It is simply not feasible to pay a highly trained border services officer to stand at an unused border crossing. Additionally, in cases of emergency, contingency plans are in place to allow smooth passage through the border in non-peak hours.

[The Environment, April 1st, 2015]

Mr. Speaker, our government will continue to move forward with its sector-by-sector approach. We are reducing emissions without a carbon tax, which would raise the price of everything.

Given the chance, both the NDP and the Liberals have said they would introduce a carbon tax. This would kill jobs and raise the cost of gas, groceries, home heating, and just about everything else. Canadians can count on our government to do exactly the opposite.

[The Environment, April 1st, 2015]

Mr. Speaker, under our Conservative government, the tax burden on Canadians is at the lowest level in more than 50 years. On average, Canadian families are paying $3,400 less in taxes each year than they were under the previous Liberals. In addition, every family with children in Canada will stand to benefit from our latest tax breaks, including the increase and expansion of the universal child care benefit to nearly $2,000 per year for every child under six and $720 per year for every child between six and 17, and of course there is the family tax cut as well. The vast majority of these benefits will flow to low- and middle-income families. The Liberals and the NDP would take these benefits away and would increase taxes on Canadian families through a carbon tax.

Our government has been very clear on this issue. It does not intend to address greenhouse gas emissions through a job-killing carbon tax, as supported by the opposition parties. Instead, we will continue to take decisive action on the environment while protecting our economy. In fact, our Conservative government is the first government in Canadian history to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, and we will continue to use our sector-by-sector regulatory approach to achieve reductions in greenhouse gas emissions.

I would also like to take the time to highlight that our government has already taken action on two of Canada's largest sources of GHG emissions, the transportation and electricity sectors. The transportation sector generates nearly one-quarter of greenhouse gas emissions and has been the key area of focus for our government. We have moved in line with the United States with new regulations for both light- and heavy-duty vehicles. With these regulations, 2025 model year passenger vehicles and light trucks will emit about half as many greenhouse gas emissions as 2008 models.

The 2025 vehicles are also expected to consume up to 50% less fuel than 2008 vehicles. That will lead to significant savings at the pump for Canadians. Greenhouse gas emissions from 2018 model year heavy-duty vehicles will be reduced by up to 23%, which will also cut down on fuel costs.

Furthermore, we have one of the cleanest electricity systems in the world, with 79% of our electricity supply emitting no greenhouse gas emissions at all. With our government's coal-fired electricity regulations, Canada became the first major coal user to ban the construction of traditional coal-fired electricity generation units.

The regulations also require the phase-out of existing coal fired units without carbon capture. In the first 21 years, the regulations are expected to result in a cumulative reduction equivalent to removing 2.6 million personal vehicles per year from the roads over this timeframe.

On this side of the House, we will continue to stand up for hard-working Canadians. Unlike the Liberals, the NDP, and the other parties, we are focused on what matters to Canadians: supporting economic growth and protecting the environment, not raising taxes.

[Public Safety, April 1st, 2015]

Mr. Speaker, all members of this House believe strongly in Canadian values. Freedom, democracy, and the rule of law are bedrocks of Canadian society and so, too, is security.

The important functions of the Privacy Commissioner and Auditor General continue to be respected in ensuring accountability for government activities related to this bill. These are effective institutions, which have served Canadians well. Although, yesterday, the member dismissed as nonsense departmental officials' clarifications regarding the misinformation being spread, we respect our hard-working officials and their expertise, along with the dozens of witnesses who appeared before the committee to explain why the legislation is absolutely critical.

While the opposition continues to work to handcuff our police and blindfold our national security agencies, and fails to support measures to protect Canadians, our government will continue to do the complete opposite to ensure that law enforcement and national security agencies have the tools necessary to protect national security and every single Canadian in this country.

[Public Safety, April 1st, 2015]

Mr. Speaker, it is certainly a pleasure to rise in the House this evening to discuss Bill C-51, the anti-terrorism act, 2015. As we heard from credible witnesses at committee, this is an important bill to ensure the safety and security of Canadians, which remains this government's top priority. The threat of terrorism is all too apparent in the wake of events in Canada and around the world. The committee that studied the bill repeatedly heard that the threat was real, that it had grown and that it was evolving.

Our government needs to evolve with that threat, which is exactly what Bill C-51 proposes to do. The proposed measures in Bill C-51 will ensure that the government is better able to protect Canadians and Canadian values, such as freedom, democracy and tolerance. This is a comprehensive package of measures that will provide our security and law enforcement agencies with the tools and flexibility they need to more effectively detect and disrupt national security threats before they can harm Canadians.

First, it would ensure that information relevant to national security would be shared and actioned in an effective and responsible manner. Second, the bill would enhance the powers of the Canadian Security Intelligence Service in order to better address the threats to the security of our country. The bill would also bolster the protection of information in immigration proceedings when disclosing the information would be injurious to national security or endanger the safety of any person. Fourth, Bill C-51 would further mitigate threats to transportation security and prevent air travel for the purpose of engaging in terrorism.

Additionally, the legislation would better enable police to detain suspected terrorists and to prevent threats. This is a measure that every police representative and person in national security intelligence who appeared before the committee stressed was an important tool to all of them. Although the opposition and the member for Saanich—Gulf Islands have refused to listen to the police testimony regarding the importance of these tools, our government has, and we will provide them to our law enforcement and national security agencies to ensure they can prevent terrorist attacks from taking place in this country.

Finally, the bill would provide witnesses and national security proceedings with additional protection.

These legislative enhancements mirror many of the same authorities already available to our closest allies, including the United Kingdom and Australia.

Bill C-51 will serve as an important step forward in our country's counterterrorism capabilities and reinforce our commitment to protecting Canadians at home and abroad. In doing so, it would also ensure that adequate safeguards would be in place to protect the rights of Canadians. Most important, the measures would be implemented under Canada's already existing robust security review mechanisms and institutions.

Freedom and security go hand in hand. The provisions within Bill C-51 are designed to protect both. The highest responsibility of our government is to keep Canadians safe and keep our country secure. Although the opposition is unable to come to grips with the need to stop the terrorist plague known as the Islamic State, we will not stand on the sidelines as Canadians are threatened, either at home or from abroad.

Canada's national security institutions require modern tools to counter modern threats. I urge all members to support Bill C-51 and stand behind the work of our law enforcement and national security agencies.

[Tougher Penalties for Child Predators Act, March 27th, 2015]

Mr. Speaker, one of the reasons I decided to get into politics was because of my strong views on improving the criminal justice system and support for victims, but I have to say that at the top of the list was the protection of the most vulnerable members of society, our children.

I remember that when we introduced this legislation, I wrote directly to my constituents and received overwhelming support for the measures contained in this act, including those for ending the two-for-one deals child sexual predators were given when multiple offences of child sexual abuse were committed against different children.

I would like to ask the member why this legislation is so important for the protection of children.

[Tougher Penalties for Child Predators Act, March 27th, 2015]

Mr. Speaker, while the minister was delivering her speech, I went online to search for child advocacy centres and looked at some of the statistical information with regard to the number of both female and male children and youth who have suffered some form of sexual abuse before the age of 18. I found the statistics actually quite staggering. I was shocked to read those in print on multiple sites.

I am wondering if my hon. colleague could elaborate on the importance of the child advocacy centres that are across Canada.