Yasmin Ratansi

[World Autism Awareness Day Act, October 29th, 2010]

Madam Speaker, I am honoured to rise in the House to speak in support of Bill S-211, An Act respecting World Autism Awareness Day.

There are many of us who have been affected by autism, either through families or friends. Many of my constituents in Don Valley East have approached me to help them with this problem.

Autism can manifest itself in a variety of ways. Many times families of children of autism notice that their child's personality is different from other babies the same age. They hit milestones later and increasingly showed little awareness of the outside world. Their words became fewer, or they would bang or chew on their toes rather than playing with their toys.

Families could not understand why their child had so many tantrums and why tantrums were so common, or when a child flapped his or her arms wildly or shoved a nearby adult who ventured too near. Birthday parties or grocery shopping could be distorted by outbursts of anger and frustration and they were compounded when other people did not understand or judged the parenting of these families.

Eventually parents received the crushing diagnosis of autism spectrum disorder. This diagnostic was made worse because there was a lack of understanding by the people around them.

Most parents are concerned whether their child will be an engineer, or lawyer, or teacher, or doctor or whether their child will marry and go forward in life. Parents with autistic children face the very real question of whether their children would lead independent lives or not and who would look after them when they were no longer around.

Autism spectrum disorder, or ASD, is a neurological condition that causes a range of development disability. Some people can function well, while others are locked in a world of their own.

Today ASD occurs in one in 165 children. This represents a 150% increase in the last six years, with no explanation for the dramatic increase. Worldwide, more children are affected by autism than AIDS, diabetes, pediatric cancer. In Canada a total of 48,000 children and 144,000 adults have some form of ASD.

Someone who shows a number of the following characteristics and behaviours would likely be diagnosed with ASD: first, shows no interest in other people; second, does not know how to play with or talk to people; and third, develops language and speech skills slowly or not at all, or initiates and maintains conversations with difficulties, repeats ritualistic actions such as rocking, spinning, or staring.

Someone with a mild case could go undiagnosed for years and might only be detected when the person goes through a crisis. This would then bring them in contact with professionals, who may or may not be able to recognize this disorder.

There is no known cause for autism, but research is focused on differences in brain function, environmental factors, genetics, immune responses and viral infection.

There are those who believe that autism is caused by vaccination and this has led them to endanger the lives of their children and countless others by refusing to allow proven vaccines to be given to their children. This unproven theory of a cause and effect of vaccination and ASD has no basis in science. Parents should not be scared into making irrational choices, but should weigh all the options in regard to the treatment necessary for their child.

No single test will confirm that someone has ASD. Some people with mild forms of autism may never need treatment as they may function well and even excel. However, those with severe forms of disorder cannot function and may benefit from active therapy.

There are several ways people with autism are treated. There is the applied behavioural analysis and intense behavioural intervention. These are both designed to actively engage children with behavioural communication, learning and socialization problems. However, therapy can be extremely expensive, as it may involved a one-on-one teaching for up to 40 hours per week, with a cost ranging from $30,000 to $80,000 a year.

When I heard my hon. colleague say that the government was committed, I hope it will do the right thing and instead of wasting money on corporate tax cuts or jets, it will focus on what is necessary for kids. These kids and their parents need the money. It is very important that we have our priorities right.

Other therapy may include counselling, development of motor and language skills, diet and medication and physiotherapy. It takes hard work, patience and sheer determination to help navigate the system and allow a child to emerge from the bonds of autism. The physical and psychological strain on a family can be overwhelming and the isolation profound.

I would like to first thank the sponsor of the bill, Senator Munson, as well as many colleagues who have been supportive in advancing this cause, MPs from Etobicoke North, Sackville—Eastern Shore, Sudbury, Edmonton—Mill Woods—Beaumont and Verchères—Les Patriotes for their important work.

I also want to thank Senators Eggleton and Keon who were the chair and deputy chair of the standing senate committee, which provided an extensive report on funding for autism entitled “Pay Now or Pay Later”.

Bill S-211 calls for Canada to join with member states of the United Nations to focus the world's attention on autism each April 2. World Autism Awareness Day shines a bright light on autism as a growing global health crisis and is one of only three disease-specific United Nations' days, reflecting the deep concern that the UN has.

Bill S-211 will not change the reality for families affected by autism. They struggle to make a future for their autistic child who is stuck, who needs better care and who needs better one-on-one intervention. These parents have to fight a battle every day to get treatments and make sacrifices to pay for those treatments.

I hope the government will put its money where its mouth is. Let us ensure that the government puts money for families, for care, because that is a very important aspect. As we can see, autism has increased 150% and there is no known reason. It is important that we, collectively, ensure that this problem is curtailed and that the parents whose child is autistic have the necessary resources.

The bill would increase the opportunities of Canadians to learn about autism and recognize that in their communities there are families living with ASD. Last year the United Nations hosted a rock concert by Rudely Interrupted, whose members have various disabilities, including ASD.

It is important that we fund research into the causes, prevention, treatments and cure of autism and raise public awareness about families. In 2006, the American combating autism act authorized nearly $1 billion in expenditure over five years to help families. One in three, or approximately ten million, Canadians will be affected by a neurological or psychiatric disease disorder.

This past year Yoko Ono unveiled Promise. Let us keep our promise and help those children.

[Office of the Prime Minister, October 25th, 2010]

Mr. Speaker, this is not about Mr. Wright's resumé; this is about the Prime Minister's judgment. Conservative MPs at the ethics committee have been ordered to block a motion demanding the release of the secret terms of Nigel Wright's employment.

Why are the Conservatives so scared of releasing the terms of this secret deal? What do they have to hide?

[Office of the Prime Minister, October 25th, 2010]

Mr. Speaker, Canadians are still in the dark about the secret deal struck between the Prime Minister and Nigel Wright.

In less than two weeks, Mr. Wright will have access to the most commercial secret material in Canada. He is on loan from Onex, a company doing business with almost a dozen federal governments. Ethics will require that Nigel Wright not work with any company that does business with the federal government for one year following his employment in the PMO.

Therefore, what is it going to be: a year off cooling period for Nigel Wright or Onex does no business with the federal government for at least 12 months?

[Interparliamentary Delegations, October 20th, 2010]

Mr. Speaker, pursuant to Standing Order 34(1), I have the honour to present to the House, in both official languages, the report of the Canadian delegation of the Canadian Group of the Inter-Parliamentary Union, concerning its participation at the 21st session of the Steering Committee of the Parliamentary Conference on the World Trade Organization, at IPU headquarters in Geneva, Switzerland, on June 24 and 25.

[Government Spending, October 20th, 2010]

Mr. Speaker, this government wasted $1.2 billion on the G8 and G20 meetings held in Canada. That money was spent recklessly. For example, the government built a fake lake and many other completely useless things. It also impacted the lives of thousands of Torontonians. This government is incapable of managing a nation's economy.

My constituents believe that a better way to spend money, create jobs and help the environment would be to invest in the extension of the overburdened and incomplete rail system that serves the vast majority of Torontonians.

Why does the government shy away from funding projects that will create jobs and have a lasting benefit to hundreds of thousands of Canadians instead of wasting taxpayer dollars?

[Ending Early Release for Criminals and Increasing Offender Accountability Act, October 18th, 2010]

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to speak to Bill C-39, An Act to amend the Corrections and Conditional Release Act . Although I support the bill being sent to committee, the bill has many flaws. When we deal with a crime agenda or matters relating to correctional or conditional release or safety issues, it is important that we take a very thoughtful approach to it.

I have been in Parliament since 2004. In 2006, when the present government took over, it introduced crime bill after crime bill. It talked about getting tough on crime and then prorogued Parliament. It reintroduced similar bills under different names and then prorogued Parliament again. It has now introduced this bill for a third time.

I think Canadians are getting tired of this game of chicken. If the government is really concerned about the safety of Canadians, then it should have attended to the bills. The normal modus operandi of the government is to blame the opposition. I do not think that is a good idea because the opposition did get all those bills through in the previous Parliament. I hope this time Bill C-39 will go off to committee and be addressed there.

The issue of being tough on crime does not necessarily result in the safety of citizens. Why do I say that? Statistics and experts have proven that it is not the super jails that keep citizens safe. It is the deterrent or prevention of crime that is the better approach. If building super jails and having tougher sentences was the panacea, our neighbours to the south would have the safest country in the world. Unfortunately, they do not. In fact, the recidivism rate is 70% in the United States. This is the rate of reoffending. People should know that when offenders get out of jail their potential to reoffend gets greater. Why does it get greater? For example, if a person is put in jailed for petty theft and put in jail with criminals who have committed worse criminal offences or who have worse criminal records, then they get to meet with those types of people and in fact learn skills.

What could we do to overcome these types of issues? We could have areas within prisons where we could teach inmates life skills. Many of the prisoners in jail do not have life skills. They commit petty crimes and then commit more and more crimes. I think it is important to look at the whole cost of prevention rather than cure.

Experts have told us that the deterrent to crime is investment in literacy, investment in job creation, investment in affordable housing and investment in mental health.

Why do I talk about literacy? As I mentioned, people who have been in jail are not functioning at the level they need to function at. I have been on the board of the Centre for Addiction and Mental Health for 12 years, so I know what I am talking about. When we ask police why crimes are taking place, the one word they use constantly is “drugs”. When we ask them what we can do about it, they say that more beds and more rehabilitation centres are needed. We were told that no resources were available for helping the mentally ill and that once people were out of jail there was no affordable housing. When they come out of jail, they have nowhere to sleep and nowhere to go and, therefore, this vicious cycle continues.

It is important that when we, as a country, look at issues surrounding our criminal offences, our jails and our whole justice system, we are cognizant of what we should do in order to prevent crime rather than find solutions after the fact.

When people are in jail, there is another issue, and that issue is they are also exposed to people with drugs. It is sad to say but there are a lot of drugs available in prisons. Then what happens? There is the sharing of needles and through the sharing of needles, prisoners get AIDS.

We may turn a blind eye saying that it is too bad and that this type of people is not what we cater to, but it is sad day when in a developed democracy we do not look after the marginalized or the vulnerable. What is it that we are supposed to do? If we do not address the problem, we will have a huge problem in terms of our health care.

Everyone in here and all of our constituents want to be safe. All of us realize that safety is a critical issue for us. Unfortunately we do not live in a Utopia and therefore when we have to live and work within an environment that does not allow everybody to have equal opportunities, there are areas where we may not be safe.

If we are told that prevention is better than a cure, then what are some of the things we can do? What are priorities should the government have?

The current government's priorities have not been economically sensible. There has been a lot of waste. There has been hype and talk about crime agendas without an intelligent solution. The government wants to spend $9 billion on building super jails for unreported crimes.That is a little tedious for anyone to understand.

Why would the government put in so much money when statistics show that the crime rates are on the decline? In fact, what are some of the opportunities lost? We know that a lot of prisoners cannot function. For them to function, we need to invest in literacy. In this day and age when we talk about globalization, Internet savvy and computer literacy, it is hard to imagine there are those within our society who cannot function at any level and who need assistance.

People suffer from many forms of mental illness. It is important therefore, instead of wasting money on building super jails, that the government invest in areas such as social housing, literacy and mental health.

What is also of a great concern is that despite repeated demands, the government has still not revealed the cost of the so-called road map, the tough on crime agenda. It has frustrated the efforts of the Parliamentary Budget Officer who is trying to do his job to get the accurate figures.

We in Parliament need to operate on accurate figures. We need to know how much things cost, so we can make the necessary choices, whether it is this opportunity or that opportunity. The Parliamentary Budget Officer was established as part of the Federal Accountability Act. It is a shame that the government, which brought in the Federal Accountability Act, plays games with accountability. It does not want to be accountable.

My question for the government is this. If the government is so concerned with the safety of Canadians, I would like to know, and the House would like to know, what the cost is? Then Canadians can decide whether the investment the government is proposing is going to keep us safe.

When we talk about the road map to strengthening public safety, the government made an assertion that crimes were on the rise, but that has been challenged by experts. We need to ensure the bill provides proper provisions. The bill's provisions should be the establishment of the right of a victim to make a statement, to hold hearings, et cetera. It authorizes police officers to arrest, without warrant, an offender for a breach of a condition while on conditional release.

Some of these issues are important, but we have had experts such as the UBC Professors Michael Jackson and Graham Stewart, the former director of the John Howard Society, who released a scathing human rights analysis of the government's correction policy.

It is important, as we move forward with any agenda, that we give it a thoughtful process. I strongly recommend that when this bill goes to committee, we have the proper hearings, that we come up with a proper solution, that we collectively work for the safety of all Canadians and that we use intelligent, smart solutions and not hype up the talk. I do not think there is anybody in the House who would like to have criminals roaming around the street and who would not want the safety of Canadians.

[Fighting Internet and Wireless Spam Act, October 18th, 2010]

Mr. Speaker, when we looked at the financial crisis, for example, we realized that the problem was financial illiteracy. In a similar way, the Internet has been given to us and everybody accesses it without reading the licences. It becomes too cumbersome and we think nobody is taking us for a ride. However, it is in the fine print that we have a problem.

It brings in a very important point. We should have Internet usage literacy which would allow us to understand what we are downloading, The government should implement that education when the committee is looking at the issues around literacy.

[Fighting Internet and Wireless Spam Act, October 18th, 2010]

Mr. Speaker, the world is getting smaller. It is becoming an island. We are connected through the Internet. We can actually go on the Internet and speak to someone in China, India and other faraway lands.

It is important that we take the lead. We in Canada have the resources, the intelligence, the educated staff and people like RIM, for example. We need to take on that role.

Which countries should we engage? Another hon. colleague whispered Nigeria. We need to get countries like China and India onboard because those are the countries where our subcontractors are going.

I hope we do take the lead and that we move forward very quickly on international cohesion.

[Fighting Internet and Wireless Spam Act, October 18th, 2010]

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to speak to Bill C-28, the electronic commerce protection act. The purpose of the bill is to deal with the issue of spam. The act would prohibit the sending of commercial electronic messages, spam, without prior consent of the recipients.

Spam represents about 60% to 80% of Internet traffic worldwide. It is a serious problem for Canadians and Canadian businesses. In recognition of the seriousness, the Liberal government in 2004-05 established an anti-spam task force that came up with the following recommendations.

The Liberal recommendation called for the government to introduce legislation that would do the following: prohibit the sending of spam without the prior consent of recipients; prohibit the use of false or misleading statements that disguise the origins or the true intent of the email; prohibit the installation of unauthorized programs; and prohibit the unauthorized collection of personal information or email addresses.

I am pleased to see that the Conservative government, through Bill C-28, is enacting all of those recommendations.

Twenty years ago a computer was not essential in carrying out our daily duties. However, now it is important to everyone, be it businesses, individuals, corporations, non-profit groups, hospitals, students or seniors. Our parents and grandparents use it. It is a mode of operation. It facilitates and eases transactions. People like to do their banking and bill paying on the Internet.

However, the ease of using computers and sharing information creates another problem of its own: the unwanted advertising, misinformation and potential threats. We all know too well the consequences of spam because it brings with it viruses and worms. In 2003, Canadian consumers and businesses spent approximately $27 billion to develop a phishing program that would detect fraud and shield businesses from attacks. This is a critical issue and the problem has grown worse since 2003. I am sure we have all had first-hand experience with spam.

I was looking at my own email and noticed that someone had sent me an SOS notice. I wondered who the notice was from. It saw that it was from a constituent of mine. I could not imagine that a constituent's email had been compromised. There was a note asking for help as the constituent was stuck in some foreign land. I had to wonder how a person was able to access a personal email and then send me an SOS note.

The good thing is, if we know our constituents, we can verify who they are. However, for unsuspecting people, if somebody were to send an SOS notice and ask for funds, they might think they know the person and send it. They may not know that person's email has been compromised.

This is a huge problem for all of us. It is important that as a collective we address the issue. Sometimes we think we have secure accounts but we often get unsolicited and junk mail. As I mentioned, I am sure no one can attest to the fact that they have never received junk or spam mail. The junk mail on its own may not be risky if one knows what to do with it and assign it to a junk folder, but there are people who do not know what to do with it and respond to it.

A classic example is when we are told that our Internet has been compromised and that we need download a program. We download the program and our computer is frozen because of a virus. The people who sent the program now want payment for a service that was not needed in the first place. There are a lot of problems going on.

The worms and viruses that can enter a system are problematic for Canadian businesses, Canadians, banks and just about everyone. We just heard that people tend to receive emails that appear to be from their banking institution, financial institution or insurance company asking them to verify information. If people are naive enough to respond to the email, they are now giving information to the person who is trying to hack their system, which can cause people a lot of problems.

Therefore, to address this issue in 2005, the Liberals released a report entitled, ”Stopping Spam: Creating a Stronger, Safer Internet”. As was mentioned earlier, the task force made many recommendations. Among those were the prohibition of sending unsolicited email or the use of misleading statements, funny titles, products, et cetera These are important changes and I do not think anyone in the House would object to what Bill C-28 proposes.

I am sure that, like me, many members of the House have received numerous complaints from their constituents on the issue of spam. The issue has compounded because of things that are now delegated to outside of Canada. When people are contracting their telephone services or banking services outside of Canada there is no control over it.

The government's ability to control or combat spam is not just about introducing legislation but also about working with world governments and organizations to develop an international strategy for reducing this ongoing burden of spam.

Internet policing is difficult as the traffic is humongous. We know that 60% to 80% of the Internet traffic is spam. This sheer volume of messages challenges the capacity of Internet providing services or legitimate business to do their business. They have to put in all sorts of firewalls, et cetera.

If the government is serious about introducing legislation and the Industry Canada's committee will be reviewing this legislation, it is important that we move quickly to enforce the legislation. Industry Canada cannot do it on its own without having the necessary resources. I would like know what resources the government will give Industry Canada to ensure an effective corrective solution.

It is extremely important for people everywhere in Canada to have confidence that the legislation provided by the government will be effective and that the sanctions are there. I believe that any legislation brought forward must ensure that we have proper resources and effective coordination.

The more rapid a response to correct this problem would ensure that those who see an opportunity for Canada as a target will find another place. However, we do not want them to find another place because that other place is where we do our business as well, in banking, financial services and whatever we do. It is a global place and we do our business globally.

I hope we will work with the international community to ensure we have a reduction in spam. I hope all members will support the bill, that it will be sent to committee for further review and that it will provide fast relief for Canadians.

[Sustaining Canada's Economic Recovery Act, October 7th, 2010]

Mr. Speaker, I do not need to take lessons from a party that killed Kelowna, that killed Kyoto, that killed child care and that killed the cities agenda. NDP members had absolutely no principles when they went to bed with the Conservatives.