Allan Rock

[Justice, May 9th, 1994]

Mr. Speaker, I watched with interest the reports of the rallies both in Calgary and in Edmonton on the weekend. Those rallies were attended by people who have genuine concerns that I respect. I read the reports of some of the things they were concerned about, including the Young Offenders Act.

As I have said to the House before, within weeks I am going to have a bill before this House to make changes to the Young Offenders Act that I think will fulfil commitments we made during the campaign and that I think will improve the statute.

In so far as the safety of Canada is concerned we ran for election on a platform that I think is a balanced one which was intended very much to secure the safety of our communities across the country, in Alberta and everywhere else in this country.

[Sexual Orientation, May 6th, 1994]

As I said, Mr. Speaker, our timetable contemplates introduction of the legislation probably in the fall.

Speaking for myself, I do not think matters of public policy should be determined in the courts. It is expensive for the litigants, and one ends up with a patchwork of public policy that is not always in the interest of Canada.

We are going to approach it with legislation. The amendment to the Human Rights Act will be introduced here. The House has our commitment in that regard and the House can expect to see the legislation the year.

[Sexual Orientation, May 6th, 1994]

Mr. Speaker, we have the intention of bringing forward an amendment to the Human Rights Act to prohibit discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation this year, probably in the fall.

That is a commitment we made during the campaign which was repeated in the Throne Speech. It is a course to which we are committed.

[Young Offenders, May 5th, 1994]

Mr. Speaker, I believe that case may still be before the courts. Therefore I do not want to comment on the facts of the case apart from expressing my sorrow at the description of the tragedy that has been given by the hon. member.

The hon. member knows, and I have told the House, that I will be bringing forward legislation in June to change the Young Offenders Act to reflect longer maximum sentences for serious violent crimes among other things. I have made that clear.

Let me go on to say that in the face of such tragedies, it is important in my respectful view to bear in mind that the simple change of a statute or enacting another law is not going to change much unless at the same time we come to grips with the conditions that lead to this kind of offence.

This government is committed not only to the kind of effective legislation we need, and the member will see it soon, but also to an attack on the underlying causes of crime. That is what we intend to do.

[Gun Control, May 4th, 1994]

Mr. Speaker, I have three points very briefly.

First there is no right in the country to bear arms. The ownership of firearms is a privilege which is accorded by government under certain strict circumstances.

I do not wish to make light of the point made by the hon. member but the fact is we are not after those persons. Let me put it this way. The object of any such measures would not be to make life more difficult for those who have legitimate reasons connected with their occupation to carry firearms. Rather, it is in recognition of the fact that the use of firearms, handguns in particular, in the commission of homicides has risen from 33 per cent to 52 per cent in the last four years.

We will be thoughtful in the development of our policies through caucus, which is going to discuss these matters, and cabinet, which will form the policies that we will bring forward to the House.

[Gun Control, May 4th, 1994]

Mr. Speaker, I have made clear that I am going to work with my colleagues in caucus and cabinet to bring forward proposals to achieve stricter gun control in the country. I think there is broad support for more effective control, and that includes particularly handguns which are not used in hunting.

Dealing more specifically with the question the hon. member has asked on compensation, that is one of the issues we have to look at. This party and this government are coming to these questions with an open mind. We are going to be sensitive to the ownership rights the hon. member has referred to and compensation is a matter we are going to be dealing with.

I am aware of the issue. I do not have a response today because caucus has not dealt with it, nor has cabinet. However, I can assure the hon. member that the process is going to be undertaken and that we are going to develop a position on this very important issue.

[Reproductive Technologies, May 4th, 1994]

Mr. Speaker, I do not believe that conclusion follows.

First, it is a matter of priority. For example, we have designed topics and background materials for the meeting of deputy ministers in mid-June. Deputy ministers of health across the country will be meeting. We will be consulting them with respect to their views and the provincial and territorial perspective on some of these issues. We will be preparing discussion papers over the summer to elicit the views of the research community on some approaches we can take to the recommendations of the royal commission.

It is a matter of priority. It is not something we are going to act upon next week. We are going to consult. We take the issue very seriously. We will come forward with policies probably late in 1994 to deal with these issues. They are matters of concern and of substance, but we are going to deal with them methodically.

[Reproductive Technologies, May 4th, 1994]

Mr. Speaker, as I said as recently as last week in this House, the Department of Justice is working with the ministry of health examining the 300 recommendations that came from the royal commission on reproductive technologies in February. Very few of them actually deal with the justice system to the extent to which they recommend changes, for example, in the Criminal Code.

Representatives of justice and health are preparing recommendations for cabinet arising from the royal commission and touching upon all of the issues in relation to reproductive technologies.

Rather than deal piecemeal with this or that part of the proposals, my approach to date has been to await the completion of the work of those officials and bring forward to cabinet policies that we believe are in the public interest and that act upon the recommendations of the commission which spent a long time looking at these complex questions.

In response to the hon. member, I say that rather than identifying policies a bit at a time we are looking at the recommendations as a whole. We will be coming forward through cabinet with the government policy probably in the fall of this year.

[Young Offenders Act, May 3rd, 1994]

Mr. Speaker, any such undertaking would require a degree of control by a member of Parliament over the process of government that I am not sure any of us possess.

However, let me respond directly to the hon. member's question. I respect and to a large degree share the hon. member's sense of urgency in this issue. As I have said in the past, as recently as yesterday, I expect that within weeks I am going to introduce legislation in this House with respect to changes to the Young Offenders Act that we think are in the public interest.

Let me also emphasize to the hon. member that while we are concerned about crime in this country, it is not the enactment of a change to a statute, it is not the introduction of new legislation that is going to come to grips with the underlying problem we face. Quite apart from the criminal justice system we have to

take a wide ranging, holistic approach to crime in this country if we are going to make real progress.

Yes, there will be changes to the Young Offenders Act but I hope the hon. member realizes that is one of a variety of responses that we must muster to this social issue.

[Child Support Payments, May 3rd, 1994]

Mr. Speaker, may I take the hon. member's question to relate to the issue of appeal.

If the hon. member is asking whether we are going to appeal the judgment, may I first of all say that although I have received the reasons over the lunch hour, I have not yet had the advantage of reading them. I know there is a dissenting judgment. I will be reading them with care and interest. It is a very important judgment. Once I have had an opportunity to consider the judgment I will be speaking with the client ministry to determine from a policy perspective what the minister would like to do and to make my recommendation.

Let me say that once I have read the judgment I will be happy to discuss the matter further with the hon. member. However, I take it her question related to appeal and that is my response if that was the point she wanted to raise.