- Member of Parliament
- Member of the Board of Internal Economy
Chief opposition whip
Member of the panel of chairs for the legislative committees
- Conservative
- South Surrey—White Rock
- British Columbia
- Voting Attendance: 65%
- Expenses Last Quarter: $130,172.43
- Government Page
Madam Speaker, my friend, also having been a prosecutor before he came to this place, is well aware of the havoc that is wrought by drug dealers, drug smugglers and those who would traffic to our children and even incorporate them into gang life at a very young age, partly through getting them addicted to drugs.
Yes, it is very serious that the NDP are supporting the Liberals in their soft-on-crime approach.
74 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Madam Speaker, we believe, on this side of the House, in trying to help lives lost to drugs. We believe in recovery. We believe in helping people make better choices and get to better places in their lives, so that they can get back to being productive. We also believe in being compassionate. I have spent a lot of my volunteer time, over many years now, working with recovery programs and working with those who are the subject of addiction, something that touches on so many lives in Canada and so many of us here in the House and our families.
I appreciate the respect that the member for Vancouver Kingsway showed me in the way he spoke to me, as opposed to the previous member from the Liberal Party.
130 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Madam Speaker, it is actually a commission, not a committee. I do not believe the member, who kept referring to me as “she” as opposed to being more respectful and using the term of either “member” or even my riding, was listening to my speech.
The whole point of my speech was that we are supporting Bill C-20. We believe in transparency and accountability. We believe the idea of a commission to put forward complaints, filter through and facilitate them is a good idea, but it was also to point out the very hard work and challenges that both the RCMP and CBSA agents face on a daily basis. That was the point.
118 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Madam Speaker, I have faith in your pronouncements, not in the heckling from the other side.
I will be unequivocal. Our justice system is broken and the blame rests with the Prime Minister. He changed the system to cater to the sensibilities of left-wing activists who want to defund the police, rather than support communities who want safe streets for their children and grandchildren. The new justice system puts criminals first and the victims last. It took the justice minister almost a year to appoint a new victims ombudsperson. It puts the wants of one offender ahead of the needs of a whole community. It frees the felon while tying the hands of law enforcement.
Despite these challenges, the RCMP in White Rock and Surrey do yeoman's work to serve and protect the residents of my riding, as do the CBSA agents who work at the Peace Arch and Pacific Highway border crossings, which includes dealing with migrants illegally crossing into Canada daily, not at points of entry. They are the first line of defence for my community against human trafficking and the illegal importation of guns and drugs.
The Liberals threw CBSA a curve ball last year when they implemented the costly and ineffective ArriveCAN app. Their $54-million boondoggle frustrated travelling seniors, hampered our tourism sector and put border agents in the untenable position of enforcing the mandatory use of the app. As always, CBSA agents conducted themselves with professionalism.
With that said, the public should always have a right to question the decisions and actions of any law enforcement agency, including the RCMP and CBSA. We lean into and support these agencies, but also believe in transparency and accountability. That is why Conservatives will support Bill C-20. This legislation requires the RCMP and CBSA to share information related to public complaints with a new body, the public complaints and review commission. The commission would make recommendations for potential disciplinary action to the relevant law enforcement agency with legislated timelines to respond.
The bill would require both the RCMP and CBSA to report on actions taken in response to the commission's recommendations. The legislation would also require the commission to report disaggregated race-based data to Parliament.
While I will vote for the bill, I am taking this opportunity to raise a word of caution. We cannot allow our public safety institutions to erode any further. Come the next election, whenever that may be, voters in the Lower Mainland and on Vancouver Island can count on Conservatives to clean up the mess made of our cities and of our borders. We will restore safe streets and protect the rights of victims.
I have been talking about Bill C-20 throughout.
456 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Madam Speaker, I am going to repeat a bit because of the interruption.
Just yesterday, a prominent member of the Indo-Canadian community in Surrey told me of significant gaps in the evaluation of gang prevention programs. He noted that some programs have not been evaluated since 2012. That is 10 years ago. He asked, “How can you monitor effectiveness, assess performance targets or implement lessons learned if you continually lag behind in program evaluation?”
The government likes to make announcements with big dollar figures, but if the money does not help at-risk youth access employment and deal with their trauma, then the government is failing. Just last week, with the support of the NDP, the Liberals eliminated mandatory prison time for serious gun crimes, including robbery or extortion with a firearm, weapons trafficking, discharging a firearm with intent, using a firearm in the commission of a crime, and reckless discharge of a firearm.
While the Prime Minister is bringing in bills like Bill C-20 and letting drive-by shooters and gunrunners back into our community, he had the gall to come to Surrey recently to announce new gun control measures. His plan targets legal firearms owners, including hunters, sport shooters and collectors, forcing them to hand over their property to the government. On the one hand, he is punishing and confiscating the assets of law-abiding citizens, and on the other, he is giving criminals a break. It does not make sense.
Meanwhile, in the middle of the opioid crisis, the Prime Minister eliminated mandatory prison time for drug dealers. For context, over 31,000 Canadians have lost their lives to overdose since he became Prime Minister. Now the crime of producing heroin, cocaine, fentanyl or crystal meth is not subject to a mandatory minimum sentence. The same goes for drug smuggling and drug trafficking. What are the 13 NDP MPs from B.C. doing about it? They voted for this reckless plan.
All of this comes as the violent crime rate is spiking to a level not seen since the end of the Chrétien-Martin era. It is up 32% since the Liberals took office. Just last month in Burnaby, Constable Shaelyn Yang was stabbed to death. My thoughts and prayers remain with her family and the B.C. policing community.
The member with whom I am sharing time today, the member for Barrie—Springwater—Oro-Medonte, just had the heartbreaking job of attending the funerals of two Barrie police officers who were killed in the line of duty in October. He knows the pain that this tragedy inflicted on his community and beyond. These stories are becoming commonplace in Canada.
Under the watch of the Liberal Party, homicide rates are up nearly 30%, gang-related murders are up 92% and sexual assaults have increased by 61%. Police-reported hate crimes have increased 72% over the last two years. I will be unequivocal—
494 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Madam Speaker, in response, I take great offence to the member's point of order, because I mentioned the bill at the beginning. I set it out. I am talking about the kinds of things RCMP officers and border services agents, who will be the subject of these complaints, are dealing with on a daily basis. What they deal with on a daily basis is very relevant to why we should have a complaints commission, and that is exactly what I am talking about.
84 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Madam Speaker, I rise to bring a British Columbian perspective to the debate on Bill C-20, the public complaints and review commission act. This legislation would create a framework for reviewing complaints against Royal Canadian Mounted Police officers and Canada Border Services agents.
These law enforcement professionals work tirelessly to keep our communities safe, and they deserve the respect and support of this House. Unfortunately, the federal government is complacent about protecting Canadians, making a difficult job even harder for border agents and RCMP officers. B.C. cities, including my home of Surrey, are facing an onslaught of crime, including gang activity, property damage and violence.
It is no wonder. In 2019, the Liberals passed legislation that directed a principle of restraint when imposing bail conditions. Under this soft-on-crime policy, police are often forced to release known criminals on a promise that they will show up in court, a practice known as catch and release.
This approach is not working in B.C. Last December, in Surrey, a man with a criminal record of 23 convictions of assault attacked a mother and her 11-month-old child. Also last year, another man stole a ferry vessel from Victoria harbour. He was arrested, released and later caught shattering the windows and doors of local businesses. In Kelowna, one man is responsible for 346 complaints to local police in the last six years, leading to 29 convictions for assault and property crime. This is not unusual.
The BC Urban Mayors' Caucus has sounded the alarm bells, calling for action to prevent this cycle of crime. The Surrey Board of Trade, an organization normally associated with economic development in my region, is expressing its concern with crime on the streets. It recently said:
The economic development of any community relies upon its reputation as a safe, viable region in which to locate and do business, with supporting infrastructure, community assets and, most importantly, customers willing to walk in the door. However, if customers feel unsafe, they won't come. If the reputation of a region is suspect, businesses won't come.
The breakdown of public safety has hit my community of South Surrey—White Rock and nearby areas hard, but the problem extends far beyond B.C. It is a national mess. We all watched with horror this summer the mass killing on James Smith Cree First Nation in Saskatchewan. The perpetrator had been charged with over 120 crimes and convicted 59 times, but none of that prevented him from taking 10 indigenous lives.
To make matters worse, the Liberals have rewritten sentencing for serious crimes, putting criminals back on the street sooner than they ought to be. They lowered sentences for crimes like assault with a weapon, abduction of a minor and participation in the activities of a criminal organization, making these crimes eligible for summary convictions. The Prime Minister expanded house arrest for other serious offences, including sexual assault, kidnapping, human trafficking, motor vehicle theft and arson.
The government is also failing when it comes to gang prevention. Just yesterday, a prominent member of the Indo-Canadian community in Surrey—
524 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Jun/16/22 4:44:37 p.m.
- Watch
- Re: Bill C-9
Mr. Speaker, I certainly do not feel the Conservatives need to take any lessons on partisanship in the House from that member in particular. The government seems to have fallen in love with closure and shortening debate. We do not agree with that. If it is something worth talking about, we want to talk about it.
56 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Jun/16/22 4:42:14 p.m.
- Watch
- Re: Bill C-9
Mr. Speaker, I always love getting a question from someone representing Nanaimo—Ladysmith because I was born in Ladysmith and raised in Nanaimo. I love hearing from people from Vancouver Island, and I thank the member for standing today in the House.
I agree that this bill seems to have widespread support, for which I am grateful. However, the management of the legislative calendar lies squarely with the government, and if the government felt this was as important a bill as I do, it should have been brought forward earlier for full debate and comment. Obviously, there are many people in the House who want to comment on this bill, give interventions and get the message out to the people they represent in Canada regarding why this bill and its passage will be beneficial to our administration of justice.
Here we are shortly before the summer recess debating a bill that I support, but I would like to see a whole debate on it. Then we can move forward in due course.
173 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Jun/16/22 4:40:41 p.m.
- Watch
- Re: Bill C-9
Mr. Speaker, I thank my hon. colleague for his vast contributions on the justice file in this place. He is very knowledgeable, and I certainly always appreciate our collaborations.
The vacancy of the ombudsperson for victims of crime is actually appalling. This is such a crucial aspect of our judicial system and of confidence in that system being fair and just. I am sure there are many worthy candidates, and I am sure there have been many worthy applicants, which means the government simply has chosen not to move forward with that appointment. It should be done. It should be done quickly. It should have been done a long time ago, but I would love to see it done quickly for all victims in Canada.
125 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Jun/16/22 4:31:57 p.m.
- Watch
- Re: Bill C-9
Mr. Speaker, like some others in the House and like my colleague who was just speaking, I am a lawyer, and the practice of law has been a large part of my life. My son and two of my daughters followed me into the legal profession, and it is a source of pride to me as they pursue their professional careers.
I continue to be grateful to have been appointed a Queen’s Counsel some 23 years ago, and to have been elected president of the B.C. branch of the Canadian Bar Association the year previous. I have a deep appreciation and passion for the law and its unbiased application.
In the plainest of terms, Bill C-9 amends the Judges Act to replace the process through which the conduct of federally appointed judges is reviewed by the Canadian Judicial Council. It establishes a new streamlined process for reviewing allegations of misconduct that do not reach the threshold for a judge’s removal from office, and the process by which recommendations regarding removal from office can be made to the Minister of Justice.
These provisions also apply to persons other than judges who are appointed under an act of Parliament to hold office during good behaviour. This bill was previously tabled in the Senate as Bill S-5 on May 25, 2021. The legislation before us is the result of consultations conducted by the federal government in 2016 on reforming this process. That is six years ago.
It is incredibly important that the judicial system be just and fair, holding accountable those who are both behind and in front of the bench. Increasing public confidence in the judicial system, while ensuring the independence of the judiciary, is necessary for the foundations of our justice system to continue to function as intended.
Many will recall that in response to comments from Justice Robin Camp at a sexual assault trial in 2014, former interim Conservative leader Rona Ambrose introduced a bill to require seminars on sexual assault be taken by federally appointed justices
At the time, the Alberta Court of Appeal panel ruled that Justice Camp seemed not to understand laws on consent and an alleged rape victim’s sexual activity, and that his acquittal of the man may have been coloured by “sexual stereotypes and stereotypical myths, which have long since been discredited.” Justice Camp’s ruling was thrown out and a new trial date set. Justice Camp went on to resign from the bench in 2017, after the Canadian Judicial Council ruled he should be removed from office.
Before this case, there were volumes of case law and newspaper columns about jurists who misapprehended sexual consent or post-assault behaviour, who then went on to preside in court and rule again on other such cases.
An earlier version of the bill received royal assent on May 6, 2021. This bill can be viewed as an attempt to increase confidence in the judicial system, which had been shaken by the words and actions of Justice Camp and others.
Fairly representing victims' rights is an integral aspect of the proper functioning of the judicial system. One important aspect of the court process is the submission of victim impact statements: written statements from a victim or victims that describe the physical or emotional harm, property damage or economic loss that the victim of an offence has suffered. Our courts take these statements into account when an offender is sentenced. This gives victims of crime a voice in the criminal justice system.
The government has not been prioritizing victims' rights, and it is failing Canadians and the integrity of our judicial system as a result. Inexcusably, the role of the federal ombudsman for victims of crime has been vacant since October 1, 2021, with the justice minister’s office saying it will be filled “in due course.”
The ombudsperson has a critical role in highlighting and reviewing systemic issues that negatively affect victims and emerging issues. This vacancy is simply unacceptable, and sends a message to survivors and Canadians alike that they will not necessarily be represented fairly in the justice system. Adding to concerns that victims of crime are not being heard is Parliament’s failure to complete a review of the Canadian Victims Bill of Rights. The review was supposed to happen in 2020.
Canadians’ perspective of the judicial system reflects, in part, these failures. According to the Justice Canada studies, regardless of whether their cases did or did not go to trial, participants were asked to rate their level of confidence in the police, the court process and the criminal justice system in general.
Few stated that they were very confident. Indeed, approximately two-thirds of the responders stated that they were not confident in the administration of justice in general. This data is not coincidental. It is imperative that our judiciary system continues to adapt to effectively represent Canadians fairly.
A Department of Justice report stated that:
For the 2016/2017 fiscal year, 42% of all sexual assault case decisions (levels 1, 2, and 3) in adult criminal court resulted in a finding of guilt.
According to StatsCan, statistical evidence classified 14% of level 1 sexual assault incidents as unfounded in 2017. In comparison, the more serious levels of sexual and physical assault were classified as unfounded in only 9% of level 3 sexual assaults, 7% of level 2 sexual assaults, 3% of level 2 physical assaults and 1% of level 3 physical assaults. Why is there a difference?
This bill would modify the existing judicial review process and allow for sanctions such as counselling, continuing education and reprimands. Improvements in the administration of justice will result.
The bill states that the reasons a judge could be removed from office include:
(a) infirmity; (b) misconduct; (c) failure in the due execution of judicial office; (d) the judge is in a position that a reasonable, fair-minded and informed observer would consider to be incompatible with the due execution of judicial office.
In the case of a complaint that alleges sexual harassment or discrimination, it would not be dismissed. The full screening criteria would be published by the Canadian Judicial Council. The minister and Attorney General may request that the Canadian Judicial Council establish a full hearing panel to determine whether the removal of a judge from the office of a superior court is justified.
The council would submit a report within three months after the end of each calendar year with respect to the number of complaints received and actions taken. This is a prudent measure that would ensure transparency and accountability from a senior group of jurists exercising quasi-constitutional duties.
Such provisions in this bill would enhance and strengthen the Canadian legal system as a whole. As a former parliamentary secretary to the Minister of Justice, I welcome this legislation. Bill C-9 is a move in the right direction. It is not the end of the journey, but the start of the journey.
1182 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Jun/16/22 11:24:50 a.m.
- Watch
- Re: Bill C-9
Madam Speaker, I thank my hon. colleague for bringing this forward. As a former Canadian Bar Association president and long-time lawyer before I came to this place, I know that one of the things we always fought for and spoke up for was independence of the judiciary. That is something that is integral to confidence in our justice system. However, in today's world, when all judgments that are made public are scrutinized by the public and sometimes hard to explain, it seems to me that a process for looking at the conduct of judges that would not necessarily meet the threshold of Judicial Council review makes some sense.
I am interested in my colleague's thoughts on how this bill interacts with our common support for independence of the judiciary.
132 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- menumenu
- notificationsnotifications
- home
- mailmail
- searchsearch
