SoVote

Context: House Hansard - 147 - Dec/13/22

Ms. Raquel Dancho (Kildonan—St. Paul, CPC)

Dec/13/22 2:56:40 p.m.
Watch
Re: Bill C-21

Mr. Speaker, we have a situation where a serious criminal was heavily armed, trafficking drugs and doing it all illegally. It is because of the Liberals and their soft-on-crime policies that this man, instead of going to prison, can now serve his sentence from the comfort of his home. That is a serious crime but no serious time under the Liberal government. Why are the Liberals going soft on criminals on one side and letting this guy serve house arrest in the comfort of his home, but attacking honest, trained, tested and law-abiding hunters and farmers? Why are the Liberals doing that? Why are their priorities so misplaced?

111 words

Context: House Hansard - 147 - Dec/13/22

Mr. Larry Brock (Brantford—Brant, CPC)

Dec/13/22 2:57:56 p.m.
Watch
Re: Bill C-21

Mr. Speaker, once again, criminals are thanking the Liberal government for its soft-on-crime agenda. This week, a Montreal criminal was convicted of drug trafficking and possession of loaded illegal weapons. Instead of a mandatory minimum sentence in prison, he is serving his sentence in the comfort of his own home. The government is failing Canadians. Crime is skyrocketing, and instead of dealing with the problem, it wants to ban hunting rifles. When will this government stop targeting law-abiding hunters and finally go after the dangerous criminals?

89 words

Context: House Hansard - 147 - Dec/13/22

Mr. Rhéal Fortin (Rivière-du-Nord, BQ)

Dec/13/22 5:52:06 p.m.
Watch
Re: Bill C-291

Madam Speaker, Bill C‑291 is a bill that could, in other circumstances, be described as practically useless. It only changes some words. Changing the title of a bill and the name of a crime in the Criminal Code may seem rather inconsequential. In this case, there is absolutely nothing inconsequential about it. In this case, we are talking about holding criminals responsible for their actions.

67 words

Context: House Hansard - 147 - Dec/13/22

Mr. Kevin Lamoureux (Parliamentary Secretary to the Leader of the Government in the House of Commons, Lib.)

Dec/13/22 6:10:55 p.m.
Watch
Re: Bill C-291

Madam Speaker, it pleases me to see that the legislation received wide support at its introduction, at second reading and at committee, and now we have the legislation before us today in its first hour of third reading. Based on the comments we have heard consistently over the last while on this legislation, I expect that all members of the House of Commons will be supporting and voting in favour of it, and for good reason. When the member for Kamloops—Thompson—Cariboo was standing up and reflecting on his time as a prosecutor, he said that he was prepared to take on and continue the challenge of going after these offenders. It made me reflect on a discussion I had with a police officer a number of years ago. The police officer said that he and a couple of others were involved in gathering information related to child pornography. What we are now talking about is widening the scope of child pornography to call it “child sexual abuse and exploitation material”. There was an impact on that particular police officer, and he provided comments on that. He was making reference to Calgary at the time, because I believe that is where some additional attention was given by the government of the day in terms of going after Internet exploitation. It had an impact on individual investigators, and it was difficult for those who had children to go home and see them. One can only imaging having to deal with that on a daily basis. I can sympathize with individuals who look at the legislation and say it must happen. There is no doubt in my mind that we will see the change. I say that based on discussions I have had with caucus colleagues and after listening to members across the way talk about it. Replacing the words “child pornography” with “child sexual abuse and exploitation material” broadens the scope and gives a much clearer and better sense of what we are talking about. Child pornography is, in fact, one of the most disgusting and horrific ways one can abuse a child. When we talk about it, we need to have an understanding of the impact it has. It has a devastating impact on the lives of not only the victim, but the people around the victim, such as their family and friends. Obviously most important is the victim. As the words say very clearly, we are talking about a child. When we think of the ages of the children being exploited, as has been brought to my attention on a number of occasions, we are talking about children as young as six months old to children up to the age of 18. Regarding the type of exploitation that takes place, I do not know if trying to describe it in terms of actions is the way to go here, but what I would like to do is emphasize the degree, because often when people think of these materials being circulated, they think of things such as organized crime being behind it. I would like to highlight two things that I find so upsetting in dealing with this issue. One is the end-user, the individuals who are participating and who ultimately cause any form of a demand for it. They are the consumers of these disgusting materials where children are being exploited. That is what offends me most. The individuals in question might actually surprise some. I was at a discussion where we were talking about child exploitation, and I was surprised to hear that there is a very strong component where we get family members who will exploit their own children. How does a mother, father or any guardian take a four-year-old and put that four-year-old in an environment where there is some form of exploitation, sexual exploitation in particular? When I posed that question, I was told that there is an issue in many third world countries where the child is the source of income for the family. In my mind in no way does that justify the exploitation of the child, but I learned something from that. We could then bring it forward to that more organized crime element, where it is well thought through. We could call it Internet luring. There are also individuals who will hang out at terminals where they know young people will go by. They lure young people through all forms of trickery, and before we know it, they are being exploited and being taken advantage of. Whether it is the individual guardian or parent exploiting their own child or it is organized crime where we get that exploitation taking place, and everything in between, I believe Canadians look at it in the same manner I do and see it for what it is: a horrific crime of child abuse in the worst way. At the end of the day, we factor in all the things that need to be factored in, and we take a look at the legislation. It is legislation many would argue is fairly straightforward legislation. It is legislation, as I indicated, that I am expecting all members to be voting in favour of when it comes to a vote. It is pretty straightforward in the sense of changing or replacing the word “child pornography” with “child sexual abuse and exploitation material”, which I said at the very beginning widens the scope and provides a better clarification of what civil society, our neighbours and our constituents, would want us to do. It is indeed a very serious issue, and I believe all members on all sides of the House recognize the sensitivity of it. As I said, I do believe that all members will in fact be voting in favour of it. An hon. member: Then pass it today.

989 words