44th Parl. 1st Sess.
October 17, 2023 10:00AM
- Oct/17/23 3:04:49 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, we hear a lot of talk about the CBC's upper management these days, but never for the right reasons. There was the n-word incident, then there was the podcast translated in Paris because, as everyone knows, the Quebec accent lacks international appeal. The latest is a memo to reporters reminding them not to call Hamas terrorists. We all know that Hamas's horrific attacks constitute terrorism. Journalists know it, and they also know how to use words, even the most loaded ones.
Will the minister remind CBC management that newsrooms must remain absolutely free not only from political influence but also from ideological influence?
108 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Oct/17/23 3:07:46 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, the Conservatives may not applaud as vigorously for me. I agree with my colleague that the CBC and Radio-Canada do outstanding journalistic work, and that must be protected. Journalists, however, know how to use loaded words. Journalists know how to describe the despicable acts committed by Hamas on October 7. That is their job.
However, CBC management's directive is something else entirely. It looks a lot like censorship. CBC higher-ups are actually muzzling the press. They are taking a political stance. That is absolutely not the broadcaster's mandate. Yes, CBC management is independent, but I do want to ask the minister the following question.
Does she think that, as a matter of principle, CBC management should be getting involved in journalists' work?
128 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Oct/17/23 4:16:15 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, sometimes, once in a generation, the Conservatives have an idea that makes a modicum of sense. Unfortunately, they always hide their good ideas behind wacky political stunts.
Last June, the Bloc Québécois supported a similar motion calling for a plan to return to balanced budgets. We believe that this is the reasonable and responsible thing to do for a government. Governments need to have some idea of what is ahead.
The Conservatives are once again trying to force the government to table a road map to balanced budgets. However, they want it in a few days only, by October 25.
If it is so important—and we believe it is— why are the Conservatives once again sticking this inside a political black pill that is impossible to swallow and that they will then use to show that the Liberal government has stumbled and not delivered? The Liberals are perfectly capable of doing that themselves without “gotcha” motions.
167 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Oct/17/23 4:34:15 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, I am going to repeat a question I asked my Conservative colleague earlier, because I may not have worded my question correctly. The fact is, we are not at all opposed to the idea put forward today by the Conservatives, which is to ask the government to offer some predictability, act responsibly and introduce a plan for returning to a balanced budget.
However, the Conservatives want to give the government about eight days to do this. They are demanding that it be done by October 25, when we know that this government is not necessarily the quickest at getting things done.
Does my colleague think that we could perhaps give it a little more time, for example, until the next fall budget update? Are the Conservatives really insisting on this October 25 deadline as a way to once again play political games and blame the government for what it has not yet done?
158 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Madam Speaker, I am very pleased to speak in the debate on Bill C-320.
As my colleague from Avignon—La Mitis—Matane—Matapédia said earlier, the Bloc Québécois supports Bill C-320. The Bloc's position is part of its commitment to supporting initiatives that ensure women's safety and that combat violence against women. We believe that victims will significantly benefit from obtaining as much information as possible about their abuser, as well as the situation surrounding his release, if applicable.
The Bloc Québécois's position is consistent with our support for Bill C‑233. As my colleague said earlier, that bill amended “the Criminal Code to require a justice, before making a release order in respect of an accused who is charged with an offence against their intimate partner, to consider whether it is desirable, in the interests of the safety and security of any person, to include as a condition of the order that the accused wear an electronic monitoring device.” The Bloc Québécois will always stand up to protect victims of crime and to strengthen the bond of trust between the public and our institutions. That last point is very important.
Our justice system is undoubtedly one of our most precious assets. We live in a society that is the envy of a lot of nations around the world. Section 7 of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms reads, “Everyone has the right to life, liberty and security of the person”. These are the rights that the justice system has the duty to protect for all Quebeckers and all Canadians. This duty is the guarantor of a strong democracy that protects fundamental rights. As elected representatives, we are responsible for protecting and safeguarding these rights.
We know that our criminal justice system has many shortcomings, as shown by many studies and testimonies. According to the 2022 national justice survey, nearly 49% of Canadians believe that the justice system is not really fair. That is half the population. Almost 39% of them think that the justice system is not accessible to all. One cannot be against the idea of periodically reviewing a system that is mired in red tape and where the human element is commonly pushed aside.
We think that more transparency is needed, particularly with respect to victims. We need to strengthen and, in some cases, even rebuild the relationship of trust, which does not always seem to mean much.
It is vital that victims feel safe throughout the legal process and that they believe that the rulings handed down are enough to keep them safe. Otherwise, many people will not feel comfortable reporting their attacker. That is something that we have seen and continue to see far too often. Some think that the risks outweigh the benefits. When a person comes to that conclusion, then the system has failed in its primary purpose.
With the marked increase in family violence over the past five years, as demonstrated by Statistics Canada, women and girls are the greatest victims of this flaw in the system. It is already hard enough to report an attacker. These victims have to deal with judgment, prejudice, and procedures that are often far too long. They need to be very resilient and courageous to get to the end of the process, all the while hoping that the court will decide to put their attacker behind bars for a time.
Once that happens, survivors can catch their breath. They can feel a little safer. They resume their lives and go about their business. They regain their confidence. However, after a few months, sometimes years, they learn that their abuser has been granted a temporary absence, parole or statutory release, and they are given no explanation of the procedure that led to that decision. For many of them, it is back to square one. The feeling of insecurity returns with a vengeance. Our criminal justice system, at least in its current form, does not always know how to adequately protect victims.
In my riding, I had the immense privilege of speaking with a sexual assault survivor. I did so with great humility, and I must say I was impressed. Moreover, she was a victim of a repeat offender. Before assaulting my constituent, this individual had already been incarcerated as a serial rapist. It was not just one assault; it was a series of rapes. He was released on parole. He went back to prison for a few years because he assaulted a few women while on parole, but he was released again and he reoffended. Again, he assaulted more women.
What message are we sending to victims when we release such an individual without offering his past victims adequate reassurance or, if necessary, support?
My constituent that I was talking about is a real fighter. She stood up and fought to prevent the release of this offender despite her own injuries. I have deep respect for her.
I also have deep respect for every woman who finds the strength to stand up and urge her politicians to adapt our laws to guarantee her safety and peace of mind.
It seems clear to me, under these conditions, that providing victims with an explanation for the release of their attacker is a matter of basic respect. It shows the empathy we should demonstrate in enforcing legislation and in shaping our justice system.
It gives the survivors of such crimes the right to question decisions made by the system and to file an appeal, if needed, if they feel that it is necessary. It is about properly supporting them in the very essential healing process.
Although Quebec may not be perfect, it has always stood out as a leader in protecting victims, including by bringing in electronic bracelets and setting up courts specializing in cases of sexual violence. It certainly plans to continue to serve as a model within Canada and globally. It is always important to keep the interests of the victim at the heart of the process.
For the benefit of Quebeckers and Canadians, the Bloc Québécois supports Bill C‑320. It is a small step, to be sure, but it is still a step toward building an effective justice system capable of fulfilling its mission.
This bill strengthens the right to safety of victims of crime, especially victims of domestic and sexual violence. It is somewhat in keeping with the spirit of section 7 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms that I mentioned earlier that guarantees everyone the right to security of the person.
In short, when passed into law, this bill will strengthen the protection of victims, the transparency of the criminal justice system, respect for everyone's rights and, above all, democracy as a whole.
More importantly, it will help build confidence in our justice system among women who, all too often, still do not dare to report their attackers because the system does not always seem to be on their side.
1194 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- menumenu
- notificationsnotifications
- home
- mailmail
- searchsearch
