44th Parl. 1st Sess.
June 15, 2023 10:00AM
- Jun/15/23 11:09:06 a.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, my question for the parliamentary secretary is around the amendment. It gets to the crux of the issue. I am going to give him a hypothetical.
Maybe there is a chance in some future scenario that he is a minister. What would he do if he had staff who were hiding stuff from him, so that he was not aware of some serious allegations, especially when it comes to public safety and the importance of keeping Canadians safe?
80 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Jun/15/23 12:06:13 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, one of themes in the report is the necessity to do a better job at consulting with victims before decisions are made, whether with respect to parole or within corrections services.
Bringing it back to the amendment we are debating, I would like the member's take on the importance of ministerial accountability to consider the victims who need to be informed as a priority. When ministers do not taking accountability and hide behind their staff, it reharms the victims. I would like the member's comments on that.
91 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Jun/15/23 12:23:39 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, I am going to ask the member a similar question to one I asked earlier during this debate specifically around the amendment. It gets to the root cause of how victims are not being treated respectfully at times because of a lack of accountability within the minister's office, in this case the Minister of Public Safety.
If the roles were reversed and she was a minister, would she accept staff members keeping her in the dark and not briefing her about something that is impacting victims in Canada?
91 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Mr. Speaker, I am disappointed to be speaking to the travesty of justice and human rights committed by our current Minister of Public Safety. I am disappointed, but to be honest, I am not surprised. This minister has a track record of mishandling files, which is ultimately a disservice to justice in this country and to victims. This is why we are debating the amendment put forward by the Conservative Party today, ultimately recommending that the minister resign.
Just so it is clear and on the record once again, our amendment to the motion includes:
the Seventh Report of the Standing Committee on Justice and Human Rights, presented on Monday, April 17, 2023, be not now concurred in, but that it be recommitted to the Standing Committee on Justice and Human Rights with instruction that it amend the same so as to recommend that the Minister of Public Safety immediately resign given his total lack of consideration for victims of crime in his mishandling of the transfer to more cozy arrangements of one of the worst serial killers in Canadian history, that this unacceptable move has shocked the public and created new trauma for the families of the victims and that the Minister of Public Safety's office knew about this for three months prior to Paul Bernardo's transfer and instead of halting it, the information was hidden from the families.
Obviously, I have made some very provocative statements, even in my opening couple of sentences, but I want to lay the groundwork for why I believe this. Let us go back to the minister's track record back in August 2021, when he was the minister of immigration. What happened then? We had the fall of Kabul. We had the fall of Afghanistan.
Instead of the government dealing with that situation with the ministers of foreign affairs, immigration and national defence primarily focused on helping victims, the Afghans who had helped Canada, get to safety, what did they do? They called an election. It is unacceptable.
This minister here was in that seat. He could have had a process in place, much like we have done in previous years, under the current and previous governments, so that, when we have a situation around the globe in which Canada could make a difference by allowing refugees and people at risk to get to Canada, we could do it.
This is so fundamentally important and unfortunately something that the government is still not putting the adequate priority and focus on. It is allowing bureaucracy and staff to interfere with getting the job done. That is just one thing. That is the minister's background right off the get-go.
He has now been the Minister of Public Safety since that last election. What did we see just in the last year alone on Bill C-21? Again, we saw a minister who is not focused on victims and justice but is instead focused on law-abiding hunters, sport shooters and farmers, despite him saying that, no, this was not what the bill was about. Lo and behold, there was a last-minute amendment put forth by the minister that exactly targeted the thousands and thousand of hunters, sport shooters and farmers across the country.
That bill was not focused on addressing the root causes of the justice issues that allow for criminals, mass murderers, rapists, gangs, drug trafficking, etc. It was focused again on the wrong demographic.
I am just using that to set the stage. We are now dealing with an amendment because we now have evidence that the minister and his office were aware three months prior to the general public becoming aware that Paul Bernardo, one of our most horrific serial killer and rapists, was being transferred out of a maximum security prison into a medium security prison.
I want to set the stage because we are all victims of our life experiences. We live in a Westminster system of government that allows our democracy to work on a day-to-day basis because it is all about ministerial accountability. The buck stops with them.
As for my comments on life experiences, as many members know, I come from a military background. There is a misperception out there that the military is all about following orders. That is not the case at all and is not how the military functions. Forming a plan begins from the ground up, from the lowest levels all the way to the highest levels, enabling the decision-makers to make the best decisions possible.
When I served at the higher levels, whether as a chief of staff or a director, and we were planning for stuff and doing things, there was one common theme, and that was the daily briefs. It did not matter if it was on operations overseas or here at our Canadian Joint Operations Command, there were daily briefs and the staff's primary role was to flag issues of concern directly to the decision-makers, the commanders and people who are ultimately responsible for making decisions and providing guidance and direction. This was not being blocked by the gatekeepers or the staff, and it was brought to the person in charge. That is key to the way our whole democracy works.
Members do not have to take my word for it. There was a CBC report that basically broke this news. I am going to read a bit from a CBC article that was just released, which states:
The demand for [the Minister of Public Safety’s] exit was prompted by the CBC's report that staff in the minister's office were aware of Paul Bernardo's pending transfer as far back as March 2. Subsequent reporting confirmed that the Prime Minister's Office was also made aware in March and [the Prime Minister] was himself briefed on the transfer on May 29.
According to the version of events, the minister's staff obviously did not think it was necessary to tell him about the transfer of one of Canada's most notorious murderers until May 30, a day after the move was made, and a day after the Prime Minister himself was briefed. The fact that they neglected to alert the minister about this impending transfer is puzzling in and of itself, and obviously an apparent failure at keeping him informed. However, what is more interesting is that the minister himself described it as a shocking event. How could he be so shocked when this was something his staff should have informed him of three months prior?
The minister initially said it was the Correctional Service of Canada that did it, but he has now admitted that the information flowed in, he was not briefed, and could not have really done anything about it. Lo and behold, what has he done now? He has issued a new directive stipulating that he must be informed, something he should have done immediately. That is just common practice.
Therefore, the issue I come back to is this: The minister needs to surround himself with competent staff and people who understand what is truly an important issue under his responsibility because that is how we protect our justice system and victims in this country. Ultimately, the minister needs to do the honourable thing and resign because that is truly the only option left. If he will not resign, the Prime Minister should fire him.
Another thing the government should do is immediately implement the private member's motion that was put forward by the Conservative member for Niagara Falls, which enshrines into legislation, and I am paraphrasing, that when our most notorious murderers and criminals are found guilty, they must remain in a maximum-security prison.
1297 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Jun/15/23 1:27:38 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, I would like to ask my good friend and colleague from Bay of Quinte to expand a bit on ChatGPT and the AI risks associated with it. We do recognize there is some great potential for AI. It can maybe help and streamline things, especially with data management and the sheer information overload that governments deal with. However, in particular I note the importance of guardrails and protection, because it is sort of the Wild West out there when we start talking about artificial intelligence.
87 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Jun/15/23 4:35:48 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, I would encourage the House leader to go listen to my speech from Monday night on this, because I do not accept his argument that, just because certain members of opposition parties have used hybrid, it is somehow hypocritical of us.
It is the rules. It is like the analogy I used on Monday night. It is like playing hockey 100 years ago, when they could not pass the puck forward. It is like we are going to play with the same rules that were in place 100 years ago, although the rules have changed. We have to use the rules that are present, and it was decided that hybrid would be in place, but I just want to get to two quick points.
One is that the Conservative Party was in agreement, with even the Bloc on board, if a sunset clause was put in. We could have gotten to unanimity. Hybrid would have remained here for the remainder of this Parliament and into one year of the next Parliament, and then whatever government would have to come back and approve of keeping it in place.
My second thing, and I know the House leader has been around a heck of a lot longer than me, is that this place is partisan and divisive enough. The best way we can get things done in this chamber, especially for those of us in opposition, happens when we can talk face-to-face to ministers and parliamentary secretaries who ultimately have the privilege to be in government.
Would he agree, even as another step forward, to not just having the ministers and the parliamentary secretaries present for question period, but that the only way they should be allowed to participate in the House in debate is to be here in person, because it is such a privilege to be in government?
312 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Jun/15/23 6:20:36 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, I want to thank the member for Foothills for bringing this bill forward again. He brought it forward in a previous Parliament, and I believe I had the chance to jointly second it then. Unfortunately, I missed the opportunity to speak to it, so I appreciate the opportunity to get a short intervention in to highlight the importance of this bill.
Some of the previous speakers have already highlighted one of the key aspects of this bill: Not only is it about biosecurity and ensuring our food supply and food chains are protected, but it is about education. It is about letting Canadians know that in Canada, we have some of the best farmers and people in the food industry and agricultural sector, who really take care of their animals and the food they are raising. Canadians do not have anything to be worried about. This bill does a great job of providing that security, reassurance and education.
I want to share a bit of my own history, although I am maybe not as experienced as some of the members here in the House. I grew up on a farm. I raised 700 ducks, a couple of hundred chickens, a couple of hundred turkeys and 50 geese every year in the summers. It was free range, pretty loosey-goosey. It was not what one would call a mass production facility by any stretch. We handled everything, raising them from day-olds right through to butchering time. The good thing about being the eldest of five boys is I did all the chores to grow them, but come butchering time, I let my brothers do the butchering and the plucking.
I grew up there, and after high school I joined the military. I was on the road and not at the local farms near as much as I was when growing up and working. I was shocked when I got home and made the transition into politics and went out to visit to the farmers in my area. I am privileged to represent the riding with the most beef production per capita in eastern Canada. We have dairy farmers and have turkeys and chickens. We have everything.
When I have gone to visit beef farmers, and all farmers, I have been impressed with how seriously they take their operations, how seriously they take the health of their animals and how clean everything is. I would argue that most of the barns I have been in are cleaner than my nine-year-old daughter's bedroom. It is impressive to see the care they take. I think that is the essential message: It is not only about the health of the animals, but about how seriously our farmers take this.
There has been mention of mental health. Our farmers are in a very volatile industry. They are subject to everything from climate change to market volatility. They are stressed. Their day-to-day lives are impacted by a number of factors, and the last thing they need, and I am not trying to be provocative, is uneducated people interfering with their livelihood and their ability to put food on the table for all Canadians.
We have some great examples historically. The first question I had the privilege of asking in the House of Commons was tied to mad cow disease, BSE. I was wondering why the government had failed to react quickly enough in getting our status changed at the World Health Organization. It ended up costing Canadians in our ag industry, our beef farmers in particular, millions of dollars. My point is that lessons have been learned the hard way in this country about what happens when we have any type of illness.
I want to again thank the member for Foothills for bringing this bill forward. It is a great bill that would help keep our food industry protected. It is a good thing to see.
658 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- menumenu
- notificationsnotifications
- home
- mailmail
- searchsearch
