Kevin Lamoureux
Winnipeg North, Manitoba · Liberal · Canada
“Mr. Speaker, as I have indicated, when we take a look at this particular legislation, or any other piece of legislation or budgetary measures that the government has brought in since the last election, when Canadians elected a new Prime Minister and a new government, we will find that listening to Canadians is the top priority.”
“Mr. Speaker, I want the member to recognize the degree to which the Conservative Party always wants to talk down the economy. It brings me to yesterday, when we found out that the Prime Minister went to the G7 and that 13 new deals were signed off, with countries such as Japan, Italy, Denmark, France, Germany, Netherlands and Portugal, fi…”
“Mr. Speaker, since the last election, just over a year ago, when Canadians voted for our current Prime Minister and a new government, we have been listening to the people of Canada. Members will see that listening in every aspect of our legislative agenda and our budgetary measures.”
“Mr. Speaker, I would like to pick up on my friend's comment that we live in the real world. The real world is looking pretty good in terms of where Canada has been since the last federal election. We have a Prime Minister who has been out and about, attracting literally billions of dollars in commitments of investment.”
“Mr. Speaker, I appreciated to a certain degree the member's comments when he made reference to the issue of the process. However, I would ask him to realize that, over the years, things have changed considerably. We saw time allocation used during Stephen Harper's government a record number of times.”
“Mr. Speaker, today I am tabling a petition from a number of individuals. Actually, over 1,000 people have signed the petition. The petitioners are looking for a sense, from both the provincial Government of Manitoba and Ottawa, of working together to try to come up with a solution to deal with Manitoba's unique situation related to our wo…”
The complete record
Every one of 3,647 lines we hold for Kevin Lamoureux, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 27 of 73.
“Mr. Speaker, it is important to recognize that there are many regions in Canada and many different countries throughout the world. Diversity is the key. The member made reference to Mississauga and how successful the community has been with Japan, for example, as well as the United States. I wonder if the member can pick up on that point, how the uniqueness of Canada's different regions has an appeal to different countries, and talk about why it is so important for the Prime Minister to go to all the different countries in the world to try to increase export opportunities.”
“I wonder if the member could comment on how important this is, not just with regard to Ireland and England and how it has been incorporated into this trade agreement, but on the fact that trade is good for Canada.”
“Mr. Speaker, I wonder if the member can expand on that particular point. One of the reasons we have such a proactive government looking for ways in which we can expand trade opportunities that go beyond the United States' borders is that we have so much diversity and such high standards here in Canada with our exported products. That is something that all of us benefit from, and it is one of the reasons it is so critically important that we continue to do the things we are doing. Our greatest asset today is the Prime Minister , someone who is recognized around the world as a genuine economist and as understanding how economies work. Trade really matters. It creates jobs.”
“Mr. Speaker, this is interesting because the Bloc has consistently indicated that trade agreements should be debated well before they are actually signed off on. I think Canada is actually in a very unique situation. We are the only country of the G7 that has trade agreements with all G7 countries. Canada has been very successful in terms of world trade, and today is yet another example of how we continue to expand export opportunities. There are literally hundreds of trade treaties between Canada and other nations. With all the consultation with stakeholders, provinces, industries and parliamentarians, I am not convinced that changing the process is in Canada's best interests. Can the member explain why he believes that is the case?”
“Madam Speaker, there were many fundamental flaws, I would suggest, in the member opposite's speech. She seems to take great exception to the fact that we have a Prime Minister who understands the economy and the benefits of trade and building relationships beyond the Canada-U.S.A. border. Understanding that has led to literally billions of dollars of investment coming into Canada. We have also seen export opportunities created and enhanced, meaning jobs and a stronger Canadian economy. That is the reality. Whether Conservative members want to acknowledge that reality or not, quite frankly, from my perspective, does not really matter, because Canadians understand it and see the benefits of having a proactive prime minister who is going out and bringing jobs in.”
“Madam Speaker, I appreciate the question from my colleague because I really and truly believe he, as do I and members of the Liberal caucus, understands the true value of trade. We heard that yesterday during debate on another trade agreement, the Indonesia trade agreement, when Conservatives stood and said there is such a small amount of trade between Canada and Indonesia. I believe they support the agreement, but they were downplaying it because of the amount of trade. What we are talking about with that particular agreement is billions and billions of dollars in merchandise trade today and how we can continue to enhance that. We want to trade with the world because that is how we are going to build a stronger and healthier Canada and provide jobs into the future.”
“Madam Speaker, within this specific agreement, the short answer would be no, not that I am aware of, but I could be wrong on that. At the end of the day, when we look at trade as a whole and what the member is referring to, this is an issue about which I have had discussions with both the Government of Manitoba, in particular the minister of immigration, and federal ministers. Veterinary services play a very important role in our agricultural community. A question was asked about why we cannot export more pork to Europe. Part of that is about trying to break down some of the barriers, and we are not alone. The pork industry in the United States has the same issue. How do we try to continue to produce in a way that we are very familiar with and work with, and get the EU and the U.K. to accept the pork as we are producing it?”
“I would have thought he knew that and would have been interested in hearing me talking about pork, because it matters in Quebec as it matters in the province of Manitoba. The general gist of my discussion was to talk about how important trade is to Canada. Trade means jobs, whether in B.C., Manitoba, Quebec or Halifax, or up north. That is what we should be talking about: the principles of it. We all know, care and understand the benefits of the EU—”
“Madam Speaker, I do not know if the member is trying to hurt my feelings, but I thought I was very clear. There is a very strong and healthy relationship between the United Kingdom and Canada. I highlighted what I thought was a very important industry from which Canada has benefited immensely, which is the export of gold. If the member wants to challenge that thought, he is welcome to do that. If he wants to highlight other industries, he is welcome to do that also. Yesterday we talked about the Indonesia trade agreement. There were discussions in regard to an area of trade that I am very much interested in, that being pork. I am surprised at the member opposite, because the pork industry is so important to the province of Quebec. I know that.”
“Madam Speaker, Canada, like the United States, has a different process for pork processing, which has proven to be very difficult in getting our pork to market in the EU and the U.K. That is well established. It was there prior to the current government, and it is something that, I would suggest, is a work in progress. While we work on that area, it is important to consider Japan and other countries, such as the Philippines, because this increases the overall export of pork. That is what we want. If members were to check with HyLife in the community of Neepawa, for example, they would find that its biggest concern is actually Japan. There are literally hundreds of jobs in Neepawa through HyLife, and its interest is in Japan. Yes, we have some concerns in Europe in regard to pork, just like the United States has concerns—”
“I really do believe that Canada needs to be and should continue to be a leader when it comes to trade. The European Union and the U.K. are very strong allies of Canada, but we should also be looking at creating relationships with other nations, whether it is G20 countries, countries in Asia, or many more. Part of the G20 includes countries from Asia. We need to look at ways in which we can enhance trade opportunities, because that means a stronger, healthier Canada that is able to provide the type of jobs we want into the future. It is good for Canada to get trade agreements passed through the House of Commons. It was a pleasure to share a few thoughts on the issue.”
“Madam Speaker, I understand and respect the comments, but I think we need to take a look at the larger picture, which is why I also made reference to one of the greatest exports Canada has. The member represents a Quebec riding, and for the province of Quebec, one of the biggest exports, which I referenced, is gold. Gold is produced in virtually all regions of the country. It is one of the biggest trading things that go towards this particular agreement. This is important, because when we talk about trade agreements, as we have today and as we did with respect to Indonesia yesterday, I think it is widely accepted that members understand the true value of trade, which is why there is support for legislation of this nature. I would hope that we would continue to have that sort of support going forward.”
“There were literally hundreds of business representatives and entrepreneurs gathered in Manila to talk about trade opportunities between Canada and the Philippines. Another time when I was in the Philippines, we opened up the Agri-Food Office. That headquarters serves, I believe, 35 countries in the Pacific area for agri-food products. I had a tour of a grocery store in the Philippines that was highlighting Canadian-produced products—”
“We have seen an example of that. If we went back generations, I would challenge whether other prime ministers did this 40 or 50 years ago. I would not go far back, but I can tell members that we have an aggressive agenda for building Canada strong. A major part of that, as we are talking about today, is world trade. This is just one piece of legislation that deals with Northern Ireland and with England. These are trading partners we have had for a long time. Whether it is with trading partners like these or trading partners into the future, I believe there are opportunities. There is a heightened sense of awareness from exporters that want to be a part of world trade and export beyond the United States, and beyond even Canadian borders, obviously. I had the opportunity to travel to the Philippines on a trade mission of sorts.”
“Americans and Canadians have had a super fantastic relationship for many years, but as the Prime Minister has indicated, things have changed and Canada needs to look at alternative ways we can provide that sovereignty and sense of security, so that Canada is in a better position going forward and cannot be intimidated by a much larger southern neighbour. That is a huge motivating factor. People across the way, from the Conservative Party, will ask us to show them the deal. It is important for all of us to realize that we need to have a united front. We need to actually approach the United States in a united team Canada fashion, to be able to argue from a position of strength. (1055) One of the ways we do that is by showing that we have trading opportunities in many other countries that want to increase trade with Canada.”
“On the other hand, when we think of world trade, we actually make up about 2.5% of world trade. Those numbers alone clearly demonstrate why it is so important that Canada be engaged in trade. If we want to improve the conditions here in Canada, we must look at the impact that world trade has and continue to look for opportunities. That is why the circumstances between Canada and the United States have heightened the importance that we not be as reliant on the United States. I love the United States.”
“I hope I said that right: coconut water from the Philippines to Canada and pork from, ideally Manitoba but certainly Canada, to the Philippines. There are wonderful opportunities. I take a look in terms of what happened with the Prime Minister 's going to India. Do members know how much all of Canada would benefit by that, but in particular the Prairies? India wants energy. We have seen a government that is focused on delivering energy to the world and being a leader. I would suggest that it is so critically important for those who are interested in following the debate on trade and the importance of trade to take a look at what the Canadian government is doing today and realize that, if we look at the world population and Canada's population, we make up about 0.5% of the world population.”
“Kevin Lamoureux: Madam Speaker, yes, I have taken the tour, right from where the hogs go in to where the final product goes out, and some of that product actually goes to Maple Leaf in Winnipeg. I understand the pork industry. When we talk about world trade, what we are seeing today is a good example of a Prime Minister who has incredible connections. There are other world leaders who are anxious to actually meet with our Prime Minister. I think in terms of when he was down in Asia and he met with the President of the Philippines. Between the President and our Prime Minister, there was discussion about seeing whether we can achieve a trade agreement between Canada and the Philippines. There are all sorts of opportunities, whether it is coconut water coming from the Philippines to Canada or pork going to the Philippines from Canada.”
“HyLife has a wonderful processing centre in the community of Neepawa. HyLife is bringing a lot of economic opportunity back to a small, beautiful community in rural Manitoba. I can assure members that the community of Neepawa sees Japan as a wonderful opportunity to continue to grow and expand and be the beautiful community it is. I could talk about Maple Leaf, which has a huge plant in the city of Winnipeg. The best bacon in the world comes out of that Maple Leaf plant in Winnipeg. Actually, 50% of all bacon consumed in Canada comes from that plant in Winnipeg, Manitoba. (1050) An hon. member: What about Neepawa? Hon. Kevin Lamoureux: Madam Speaker, I just talked about Neepawa. If members want to see how efficient a plant can actually be at processing hogs, they can take a tour of the Brandon plant. An hon. member: Have you? Hon.”
“Some other Conservative members were saying that it is a relatively small percentage of trade, but we have to look at the cumulative total. In Indonesia alone, with the trade agreement that was being debated yesterday, we are talking about billions of dollars in merchandise trade. That is one of the faster-growing economies in an area of the world where we are looking for more opportunities. The member opposite was talking about the pork industry and saying that there are concerns in Europe, and I agree. There are some concerns with regard to Europe, but we also need to recognize that we have a Prime Minister who has been proactive in virtually all areas of the world. Representatives of the pork industry in Manitoba were quite pleased to hear about the Prime Minister going to Japan.”
“Today we are talking about an agreement with England and Northern Ireland. One of the industries in Canada that would benefit is the gold industry, but there are other industries as well. It is important that we expand that trade file into the many different industries that are before us. Yesterday, a member of the Conservative Party was talking about trade and the pork industry. That is an $8-billion industry for Canada, with tens of thousands of good jobs throughout Canada, in particular in the provinces of Quebec and Manitoba. In Manitoba, we have Maple Leaf, HyLife and other producers, not to mention the hundreds of farmers who support that particular industry in indirect jobs. I raise that because the Conservative member was talking about a trade agreement with Indonesia, the legislation that we had before us.”
“All they need to do is to go anywhere, to virtually any one of our allied countries, any of the G7 countries or any of the G20 countries, to find that there is a strong desire to have Canada involved or engaged in their respective economies and to build a stronger and healthier relationship. If we were to put partisanship aside and just look at the number of countries that the Prime Minister has been to, it is a fairly lengthy list. I would ultimately argue that the greatest asset any country has when it comes to expanding exports is its leader. That is why I say we have the right person at the right time, someone who really and truly understands the economy, how it works, the advantages of international trade, and why it is so very important that we expand beyond the Canada-U.S.A. relationship and that the Prime Minister travels.”
“Virtually every region of our country participates in gold exports. Securing markets matters and also assists in building relationships. Whether it is the Prime Minister or virtually any minister who has been travelling on behalf of Canadians, looking to expand that market and to diversify our exports, every single one has commented on how the world wants more Canada, because Canada really and truly has so much potential. (1045) That is one of the reasons I disagree so much with the Conservatives who say that Canada is broken when they tour the country.”
“As a prime minister, someone who has been the Governor of the Bank of Canada and the Governor of the Bank of England and has impeccable economic credentials, he understood just how important that was. That is the reason we have seen our Prime Minister , along with a number of different ministers, including the minister responsible for introducing this legislation, aggressively look outside of Canada for export opportunities. I have been a parliamentarian for many years and can say that I have never witnessed such a motivated Prime Minister and cabinet, solely focused on increasing exports and building a stronger and healthier Canada. What I see in Bill C-13 are tangible results with respect to Northern Ireland and England as economic trading partners. Let us look at one aspect many people may not be aware of. We export gold to England.”
“That was the issue in the last election, and we had a prime minister who articulated exceptionally well just how important it was that we, as a government, look at opportunities beyond the Canada-U.S.A. borders when it came to trade. Following that election, we had a prime minister and a government that were focused on that issue. Part of that focus was to build toward a stronger one Canadian economy. That is why members will recall Bill C-5 , which was all about taking down provincial barriers, working with provincial governments and building infrastructure, so that we would be in a better position to be able to export. That is what Bill C-13 is all about. It is a reflection of the need for us to have trading partners that go beyond Canada and the U.S.A.”
“Madam Speaker, it is such a pleasure to be able to rise to speak to an important piece of legislation. It is a part of a much larger picture that the Government of Canada has entered into since the last federal election. In the last federal election, members will recall that the debate during the election, and the greatest concerns Canadians had, were with respect to economic security and a sense of sovereignty. I would argue that we had the right person, at the right time, leading the Liberal Party. We had a prime minister who understood how important it was to secure an economy that was going to deliver for Canadians even at a difficult time, when we had issues with President Trump and the negotiations and discussions around trade with Canada's single greatest trading partner.”
“Mr Speaker, pursuant to Standing Order 36(8)(a) I have the honour to table, in both official languages, the government's responses to two petitions. These returns will be tabled in an electronic format.”
“I would love to see some of the other issues dealing with sexual violence also advance to committee sooner as opposed to later. The reason I say that is that the bail reform legislation could be law today had we done it back in December. Therefore, I encourage members to look at the government agenda to see that the legislation being proposed would arguably be unconstitutional.”
“If we add in the issue of femicide, we have elevated that to first-degree murder in certain situations. That is where I think the legislation really puts justice for victims of violence upfront and makes our communities safer. It sends a very strong and powerful message. I look across the way and ask members to put some of the partisan politics to the side. I would suggest that the legislative crime agenda the government has brought forward since the last federal election is substantive. There are many aspects of several bills that deal directly with the issues of sexual violence and justice for victims. The biggest barrier for legislation ultimately passing is the political will of the chamber. On the bill before us, the opposition bill, we have two hours of debate and then it would go to committee.”
“We are making sure, to the nth degree, that when we bring forward the legislation, it is charter compliant so that our courts can look at the laws being proposed and understand the severity of them. Bill C-16 does just that, as does Bill C-14 . If we think of intimate partner violence and the issue of coercive control, it is something that I would say does not get enough attention when we talk about sexual violence in our communities today. However, it is very real and being dealt with. The bill deals with issues such as stalking. What about the emotional and psychological abuse that takes place, not to mention the economic abuse? These are substantial and very real. There is also physical abuse and a lot of cyber violence. These are the impacts of sexual violence.”
“The idea of femicide has been around for a long time. I would suggest that Bill C-16 really raises the bar, and not just here in Canada. I suspect other nations would take note of that because there are significant things within it. I can say that it ultimately brings back mandatory minimum sentences for sexual interference, in particular and as an example, with respect to the sexual touching of a child. That is something for which these mandatory minimums could receive support from all sides of the House. The bill would reinstate mandatory jail time for the sexual exploitation of a child, including abuse by people in positions of trust. That is a very positive aspect of the legislation.”
“That is one of the reasons we see a great deal of commentary that comes from the government benches, asking for the official opposition to recognize the value of Bill C-2, much in the same fashion as we saw value in the bail reform legislation. For me, I think we should take a look at Bill C-16 . Bill C-16 is legislation that I would argue is just as important as bail reform. Bail reform is very important. Let us just say I would not want to have to decide which one is more important than the other. Bill C-16 is before the House in second reading. When we talk about a private member's bill, Bill C-246 , we know there is a cap. The debate will end today. It is programmed. (1800) I would love to see Bill C-16 advance because, when we look at it, there are some new initiatives dealing with coercive control.”
“This is something I would encourage members opposite to recognize. I say that in a very encouraging way, in the sense that we were finally able to deal with Bill C-14 . It is currently in the other place. We are hoping they will pass it as it is, so that we can ultimately give it royal assent, but at the end of the day, there is reason for members to say that on the issue of sexual assault, there is something very tangible there. It is more than that. We take more of a holistic approach in terms of what the Prime Minister and the government have actually brought forward to the chamber for debate. We are hopeful, as we have a substantive crime agenda, of being able to pass it all. We can talk about Bill C-2 and how Bill C-2 has the potential to empower our prosecutors to potentially even prevent some sexual assaults from happening.”
“There are opportunities for us to be able to do that. In some legislation, what we have seen is movement in the same sort of direction that is being suggested in Bill C-246 . I would cite, for example, Bill C-14 . I will go over all aspects of the legislative agenda, but if we take a look at Bill C-14, as an example, that is the bail reform legislation. It took a little longer than I would have liked to ultimately pass through the House, but we did get it passed through the House, and it is in the Senate. It actually takes a look at sexual violence and says that we are going to be eliminating conditional sentences for sexual offences. It is a positive measure in terms of bail reform. It also ensures that a judge will have constitutional authority, for repeat sexual offenders, to impose consecutive sentences.”
“Mr. Speaker, I rise today to maybe provide a bit of a different perspective and, at the same time, to recognize that sexual violence in all forms is, in fact, a horrific crime. The victims of this particular crime all deserve justice. That is one of the motivating factors in regard to why, over the last number of months, the government has brought forward a series of legislative initiatives that are, in part, dealing with the types of issues that are being raised with Bill C-246 . The primary difference is that the legislation we are proposing is constitutional. There is a strong, valid argument that if we take a look at Bill C-246 , we will find that it is in fact unconstitutional. I can appreciate that all members of the House would recognize the desire and the need to act on the issue of sexual violence.”
“Mr. Speaker, I was a little disappointed in the Conservative member's question. I appreciate that they are voting in favour of the bill. Having said that, she tried to downplay the amount of trade by saying it is a fraction of a percentage point of the GDP. We are talking about billions and billions in merchandise trade with Indonesia. That is a whole lot of opportunities for— An hon. member: No, you are not. Hon. Kevin Lamoureux: Mr. Speaker, yes, we are. They do not understand that. We are. Look at the numbers. Having said that, the member opposite talks about the issue of consultation. I think, at times, the Bloc could maybe be found to not be recognizing the amount of consultations and the amount of working with stakeholders, whether it is in the different levels of government or private industry. I wonder if he could provide us—”
“Would the member not agree that having a prime minister who is going out and about to create export opportunities is the best thing that we can do to protect our pork industry?”
“Mr. Speaker, the member was talking about the pork industry. It is an $8-billion industry here in Canada. Less than a year ago, I was with the Minister of Agriculture in the Philippines, where we highlighted industry representatives from the province of Quebec. I have met, as recently as yesterday, with members of the Manitoba pork industry. We understand the true value of that industry. The government sees huge numbers from our pork exports and sees the opportunities being created in that industry. When the Prime Minister talks about getting a trade agreement with the Philippines or when the Prime Minister goes to Japan, these are critical markets in terms of pork.”
“Mr. Speaker, the member is wrong in so many ways and put a lot of information that is questionable, at best, on the record. We would have to go back generations before we would see a prime minister who has been more proactive, whether it is signing an MOU or going to countries like India to talk about energy, have discussions and secure export opportunities second to no other. I realize the member is relatively new to the House, but does he not realize that when his party's leader was part of the Conservative government, in 10 years, not one inch of pipeline to tidewater—”
“Mr. Speaker, this is substantial legislation. Let us look at Indonesia's role, in particular as a player in the whole Pacific area. There are billions of dollars in bilateral trade between Canada and Indonesia today, and this is good news in terms of the potential that is there. Never before have we had a prime minister so aggressively go out to meet world leaders and to bring opportunities for exporters here in Canada to increase investment coming into Canada. I wonder if my colleague could just provide his thoughts on the bigger picture of how important it is that we go out and make these types of deals.”
“Mr. Speaker, if the government's responses to Questions Nos. 754 , 755 , 756 , 757 , 758 , 759 , 760 , 761 , 762 , 763 , 764 , 765 , 766 , 767 , 768 , 769 , 770 , 771 , 772 , 773 , 774 , 775 and 776 could be made orders for return, these returns would be tabled in an electronic format immediately.”
“Mr. Speaker, pursuant to Standing Order 36(8)(a), I have the honour to table, in both official languages, the government's response to 12 petitions. These returns will be tabled in an electronic format.”
“Mr. Speaker, from her seat, the member says I am not debating Bill C-9 . We are not talking about Bill C-9. We are talking about a private member's bill. It is completely relevant. It is hypocrisy when we have the leader of the Conservative Party and the Conservative Party today talking about politicization, whereas when he was in government around the cabinet table, he did nothing of the sort in regard to a transfer. At the end of the day, I think that the constituents we represent understand and appreciate the fact that it is important to recognize the independence of our entire judicial system. They have a system that is in place to protect Canadians, and we need to respect that.”
“Mr. Speaker, the interruption is unfortunate, but I am not surprised. I was making the point that at the end of the day, we do have Correctional Service Canada that ultimately is in the best position to make a decision that is not based on politics. Back in the day, when it did happen when the member's party leader sat around the cabinet table—”
“I do not think we do a service to the chamber by continuing to build up some sort of an expectation that if they were in government, they would implement the legislation, when the leader of the Conservative Party sat around the cabinet table and did not do so. If we take a look at the decision, we see that Correctional Service Canada makes the decisions to transfer and reclassify, as it did in 2014, when the leader of the Conservative Party said nothing. As a result—”
“In fact, McClintic remains in a medium-security correctional facility today. I want people to realize that a member of the Conservative Party, and the Conservative Party itself, attempted to bring forward the legislation, in essence, previously. It was voted against by all political entities except for the Conservative Party, which included the Bloc, the New Democrats, the Greens and the Liberals. The Conservatives are reintroducing, in essence, the same legislation. I point out what Ralph Goodale said, because back then, when today's leader of the Conservative Party had an opportunity and he sat around the cabinet table, why did the Conservatives not contest the decision in that situation? I think it is a valid question to be asking. At the end of the day, Hansard is there. The Conservatives can read it.”
“I tended to disagree with that, and I would hope that if someone does the research and looks back, they would find that I was consistent with my comments. (1755) It continued day after day until Ralph Goodale took the floor and pointed out a very important observation. I would like to quote Ralph Goodale in a speech that he gave here in the House. This is important because it goes back to 2014. The government of the day was under Stephen Harper, with whom the current leader of the Conservative Party sat around the cabinet table. Ralph Goodale stood up on October 2, 2018, and said: Mr. Speaker, Tori Stafford's brutal death in 2009 was a horrible, gut-wrenching crime for her family, but for the whole country too. The killer, McClintic, was reclassified as medium security in 2014. The government of that day did not challenge that decision.”
“I for one cannot believe, or I find it very hard to understand, unless one has lived that experience first-hand, just how difficult it is, especially for a parent. I do not think one can ever recover from an incident of losing a child, whatever the age of that child might be, because of the type of horrendous crimes we are talking about. It was a number of years ago that the Conservatives raised during question period the whole McClintic ordeal, another horrific incident that had taken place in Canada. It actually dealt with the same type of issue. All we need to do is check Hansard, and we will read about Conservative after Conservative standing in his or her place, talking about it in a very graphic way, in great detail.”
“I will get a bit more into it for the member opposite, so he should stay tuned and be alert, and he might actually learn something here. Let me first express what is a very difficult thing to do: to recognize the pain that has been experienced by family and friends of victims, who have had to go through trials of all different forms as a direct result of a horrendous crime that has been committed. One can only imagine how a parent of a child who has been raped, molested and then murdered is affected. We could factor in a serial killer. It affects not only the family; it also affects the community, and I would suggest it affects the country. People can understand just how horrendous it is. Sadly, in society, whether it is Canada or virtually any other nation, these crime take place.”
“We will find that this is in fact something all members, I would like to think, do, whether they are a Liberal, a Conservative, a New Democrat, or whatever political entity one might be from. An hon. member: Oh, oh! Hon. Kevin Lamoureux: Mr. Speaker, I can assure the member who continues to want to heckle me that the people I represent in Winnipeg North understand how important it is to respect the issue of judicial independence. Judicial independence is a shared responsibility between different levels of government, and I would suggest that even when we deal with incarceration and with Correctional Service Canada, which makes the determinations, I believe Canadians fully understand and respect that. I see that the member is having a very difficult time appreciating what I am saying.”