Bill Blaikie, MP - Justice

Youth Criminal Justice - C-7

Mon, 20 Nov 2006 15:42:00 -0500

Wednesday Feb. 14, 2001

Mr. Bill Blaikie (Winnipeg—Transcona, NDP): Mr. Speaker, this is my first opportunity to participate in this debate in my new capacity as justice critic for the New Democratic Party. I listened intently to those who preceded me and I signal my intention to listen intently in committee and to try to learn as much as I can.

Anti-terrorism Legislation

Thu, 02 Feb 2006 19:14:59 -0500

Monday November 26, 2001

Mr. Bill Blaikie (Elmwood-Transcona, NDP): Mr. Speaker, I listened with care to the hon. leader of the Progressive Conservative Party and I was struck by the strong language that he used. He described Bill C-36 as an assault on civil liberties. He compared it to the War Measures Act. He said it was an assault on civil liberty comparable to the War Measures Act which must be stopped.

I say this only because I encourage the leader of the Conservative Party, if that is his view of the bill and assuming his amendments do not pass, to join with the NDP in opposing Bill C-36 and perhaps members of the Bloc Quebecois because they seem to be changing their minds as well with respect to how they voted on second reading of the bill.

I know the leader of the Conservative Party was not here when the War Measures Act was introduced in the House. I believe he was elected in 1972. However his party was here at the time and so perhaps collectively they could learn from history and not want to be in the position they are in now of looking back on the War Measures Act in a critical way and presumably regretting that they supported it at the time.

C- 36 Report Stage

Thu, 02 Feb 2006 18:44:24 -0500

Monday November 26, 2001

Internet Luring

Thu, 02 Feb 2006 19:15:00 -0500

Thursday Oct. 18, 2001

Mr. Bill Blaikie (Elmwood-Transcona, NDP): Mr. Speaker, I have some brief remarks as we enter the final stages of this piece of legislation. After much deliberation and travail, the government saw the wisdom of listening to the opposition and splitting the bill. The legislation we now have before us is not controversial and not opposed by the opposition. It will proceed through the House at an expeditious pace.

Anti-terrorism Legislation

Thu, 02 Feb 2006 19:14:59 -0500

Tuesday October 16, 2001

Mr. Bill Blaikie (Elmwood-Transcona, NDP): Madam Speaker, I am happy to have the opportunity to address Bill C-36 and to put on the record the concerns of the New Democratic Party.

I want to begin by saying a few words about the context in which we are having this debate. Obviously the context is set primarily by the events of September 11 and the need which follows from those events for Canada to consider whether or not its current legal regime is adequate to prevent terrorist activity here in Canada, or prevent Canada from being used as a place where terrorist activity in other countries can be financed or in other ways supported.

This drive for new and better anti-terrorism legislation is driven by the legitimate concerns and the legitimate fear that have arisen out of September 11. It arises also out of the motion passed at the United Nations subsequent to September 11 which calls on all nations of the world to implement anti-terrorist legislation and to implement UN conventions with respect to the prevention of terrorism within 90 days. The government is moving to do that. That is a good thing and something which we welcome regardless of what particular concerns we might have about the legislation that is now before us. That is part of the context, i.e., September 11. However, we are not doing this in isolation. Unfortunately we also are considering this legislation in the context of the last few years here in Canada.

Anti-terrorism Legislation

Thu, 02 Feb 2006 19:14:59 -0500

November 20, 2001

Mr. Bill Blaikie (Elmwood-Transcona, NDP): Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Minister of Justice who repeatedly said in the House that she would listen to the committee considering Bill C-36, that she would listen to the witnesses and respond to public opinion on this matter.

Could she tell the House why today, before the committee, she refused to listen to the many, many Canadians who came before the committee? They asked for a real sunset clause on more than just the two clauses that she has indicated will be subject not to a sunset clause but to some kind of twilight zone into which the minister wants to put these two amendments and which amounts really to a 10 year sunset clause.

Anti-terrorism Legislation

Thu, 02 Feb 2006 19:14:59 -0500

November 19, 2001

Mr. Bill Blaikie (Elmwood-Transcona, NDP): Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Minister of Justice who has argued in recent weeks, in defence of Bill C-36, that September 11 changed the world.

Unfortunately for Canadians, who are worried about Bill C-36, they might be less worried if they felt that the government's attitude toward peaceful protesters had changed. Yet that does not seem to have been the case this weekend in Ottawa.

Afghan prisoner swaps

Thu, 02 Feb 2006 19:14:58 -0500

Friday Nov. 4, 2005

Hon. Bill Blaikie (Elmwood-Transcona, NDP): Mr. Speaker, the Deputy Prime Minister's capacity for self-congratulation seems to know no end. The Liberals continue to be ethically challenged with respect to their own behaviour, but I would hope against hope that they are not ethically challenged when it comes to something like torture.

Anti-terrorism Legislation

Thu, 02 Feb 2006 18:44:23 -0500

Monday October 15, 2001

Mr. Bill Blaikie (Elmwood-Transcona, NDP): Mr. Speaker, perhaps we should first take note of the fact that we are using a new procedure here that comes from the modernization report, which gives us an opportunity to comment, however briefly, on legislation. I say briefly deliberately because it is a very large bill and in some senses very complicated. Certainly we would want to reserve our final judgment on the bill until we have a chance not only to study it ourselves, but to hear from various elements within Canadian society as to what they think of this bill.

I think everyone would agree that something needs to be done. There is no disagreement there. The status quo is not acceptable. On the face of it, the very fact that we have not yet ratified these UN conventions is something we could argue about when it should have been done. However, we certainly do not want to argue any more about whether it should be done. The fact that the government is moving to do this is welcome.

At this point I would say that the approach of the NDP will be to examine the bill with a view to making sure that the legitimate rights of Canadians to domestic political dissent are not in any way threatened or curtailed. That is to say, that rights to peaceful dissent are not curtailed in any way. That would be the guiding principle in our examination of the bill, and we will be interested to see what other Canadians have to say with respect to that concern as well.

Court Administration Service Act

Thu, 02 Feb 2006 19:15:02 -0500

Wednesday, October 3, 2001

Mr. Bill Blaikie (Elmwood-Transcona, NDP): Mr. Speaker, I have just a brief comment on Bill C-30, formerly Bill C-40. It is a bill, as members will know, to establish a body to provide administrative services to the Federal Court of Appeal, the Federal Court, the Court Martial Appeal Court and the Tax Court of Canada.

Criminal Code - Firearms/Cruelty to Animals

Thu, 02 Feb 2006 19:15:02 -0500

Wednesday April 10, 2002

Mr. Bill Blaikie (Elmwood-Transcona, NDP): Mr. Speaker, I listened with care to the members who spoke before me. It seems to me that the heart of the matter is the way people regard the change in the status of animals as a result of Bill C-15B. For the first time the treatment of animals and the whole question of cruelty to animals is being taken out of the property section of the criminal code and put into an entirely new section of the criminal code. This is the source of concern on the part of at least three of the opposition parties.

Anti-terrorism Legislation

Thu, 02 Feb 2006 19:14:59 -0500

November 5, 2001

Mr. Bill Blaikie (Elmwood-Transcona, NDP): Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Right Honourable Prime Minister and concerns Bill C-36.

The Prime Minister is recorded in the press today as being flexible when it comes to Bill C-36. We were worried last week that the government might be changing its mind with respect to openness, with respect to sunset clauses.

Anti-Terrorism Legislation

Thu, 02 Feb 2006 18:44:23 -0500

Tuesday September 18, 2001 -Alliance Opposition Motion

Mr. Bill Blaikie (Elmwood-Transcona, NDP): Mr. Speaker, the floor of the House of Commons is always an interesting place. We see a development in the debate today, which is interesting and which I hope will yet resolve itself in a way that permits the House to speak with one voice on this important matter of anti-terrorism and the need to refer the subject matter of anti-terrorism legislation to the Standing Committee on Justice and Human Rights.

Awareness of WTO in US

Thu, 02 Feb 2006 19:14:59 -0500

Growing Awareness of WTO in US on display in Seattle

Because the WTO agenda and the American government’s policy agenda are so closely intertwined, we in Canada often assume that there is no serious opposition to the WTO in the US. But the American activism on display during the Battle in Seattle made it clear that America is not as much of a political monoculture as we sometimes fear it is. Here’s what former Texas Agriculture Commissioner Jim Hightower wrote about the WTO agenda:

Anti-terrorism Legislation

Thu, 02 Feb 2006 18:44:23 -0500

Nation’s Business

October 25, 2001

Good evening, my name is Bill Blaikie. I’m the Member of Parliament for Winnipeg Transcona and NDP House Leader.

The Liberal government’s new Anti-terrorism Legislation is welcome in so far as it implements certain United Nations conventions that Canada has ratified. Other sections of the legislation are, however, attracting a great deal of controversy. Many Canadians share the concerns expressed by New Democrats in Parliament that the legislation is a potential threat to the right of Canadians to legitimate political dissent, and it is this concern for the preservation and protection of legitimate dissent that guides the NDP in its approach to Bill C-36. The liberal government has not been respectful
of legitimate dissent in recent years and has created an atmosphere of mistrust
as to how it might use new legislative powers