Madam Speaker: Order, please. The hour being 5 p.m., time for Private Members' Business.
Hon. James McCrae (Government House Leader): We had discussions, Madam Speaker, with members of the parties here, and we have tentatively agreed that we should debate Resolution 55 today and Resolution 34 should be placed on the Order Paper between Resolutions 54 and 56. Are we okay so far? Then the expectation would be that tomorrow we would discuss Resolution 35, and the next day we would discuss Resolution 33. That is the direction of our discussions thus far. In other words, 34 and 55 virtually change places, but that we discuss Resolution 55 today.
Madam Speaker: Is there unanimous consent of the House to deal with private member's Resolution 55 today and replace private member's Resolution 34 as No. 55 on the Order Paper? Agreed? [agreed]
Bill 203, The Legislative Assembly Amendment Act (2).
Mr. Kevin Lamoureux (Inkster): Madam Speaker, I would move, seconded by the member for Thompson (Mr. Ashton), that
"WHEREAS the citizens of the Manitoba expect a process of judicial reform that reflects the commonly held belief that Manitobans who break the law should shoulder the consequences of their actions; and
"WHEREAS children under the age of twelve that break the law must also be held responsible for their actions; and
"WHEREAS alternative forms of sentencing, such as, Youth Justice Committees, are becoming increasingly popular in dealing with offenders under the age of twelve; and
"WHEREAS the Winnipeg Police Service has begun an important move toward community policing; and
"WHEREAS there is an urgent need for this government to work with local communities in order to establish, expand and strengthen different ways of dealing with individuals who break the law.
"THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED THAT this Assembly urge the Minister of Justice to consider the formation of an all-party justice task force to examine the issue of justice in Manitoba, holding at least 10 public meetings across the province, in an effort to solicit advice and comment regarding justice in Manitoba."
Motion presented.
Mr. Lamoureux: Madam Speaker, it is with pleasure that I introduce this motion today. It is, in fact, a very important resolution, especially if you put in the context of what has been happening over the last little while. When I actually submitted this resolution, it was a number of months ago. Since then, to a certain degree, my opinions have changed with respect to the BE IT RESOLVED, even though I think that there could be a great potential merit in seeing an all-party task force, if you like, having these public meetings.
What I have been asking the government to do is the need to have some sort of an independent review of our judiciary system. I have always acknowledged, whether it was in Estimates on Justice or Question Period inside the Legislature or other opportunities where I have had the chance to say a few words, the importance of the need for an independent judiciary or judiciary independence, and respect that as much as possible.
Having said that, what I believe has happened is we have seen a growing gap, if you like, because of the lack of any sort of a public accountability between what the public expect of our judicial system, and, in reality, what is actually happening. It is one of those issues that bridges all different socioeconomic demographics in each and every one of our ridings. In certain areas, you will find many constituents might say that health care is the issue. In other areas, you might hear education is the issue or it is jobs that are the issue.
The issue that everyone will concur on in terms of its importance is the whole issue of crime. I think that is fair to say virtually for every Manitoban and I think that this resolution is indeed very timely. There are a number of things that happen that cause great concern. One that has always been a concern for me personally has been the whole idea of break-ins. I have always thought break-in is a very serious crime, and I am disappointed in terms of the inability to get the type of statistical information that I believe are required in order to give a better assessment of actually what is a consequence of that particular crime. But it is a personal crime for me; it is not a property crime when someone has a break-in as far as I am concerned, because every break-in could turn into a home invasion. We have seen a number of armed home invasions. Most recently in the last few days, I believe, there has been three of them.
I can recall, Madam Speaker, and one of the reasons why I felt it was necessary to bring in this resolution was because of the by-election out at Portage la Prairie. I had knocked on an individual's door, a senior lady. It was three o'clock in the afternoon, I knocked on the door, and I was just about to walk away when the door opened up a little bit of a crack, and it was this senior lady who then saw me. I said hi, I introduced myself, and then she invited me in. I was amazed on how she had her place, her door, secured with bars and everything. Right away she went into the incident that had occurred a week prior, where she had a couple of thugs break into her home, pushed her down to the ground, harassed her, robbed her, stripped her of her dignity, if you like, and then walked away. Now she prefers to sleep during the daytime as a result of this particular incident.
Well, this is not a story that is all that unusual or all that unique. Things of this nature happen far too often. I have attempted in the past to try to get, as I say, some sort of a statistical breakdown of consequences, of actions of this nature, and I have found it extremely difficult to get the type of results. I am hoping through the Justice Estimates, whether it is this time round or next time round, that I will be able to get further clarification. I trust that the Minister of Justice (Mr. Toews) will address the comments that I am putting on the record today if, by chance, I do not get the opportunity during the Estimates to get those consequences.
What I can recall--and this happened a number of months ago--was that generally speaking, no one really spends more than three months if it is your second, third offence, in our jails. One of the questions that I put out in my last questionnaire was some sort of a minimum sentence for break-ins. It was overwhelming in terms of the response in the affirmative for that sort of an action.
I really believe, and I cite the break-ins as an example, that there are many different crimes, whether it is one of personal nature or property nature, in which because of the perceived disposition or consequence that there has been a lack of confidence from the public towards the whole judicial system.
That is the reason why what I would like to see is us talk about alternatives. What can we be doing as legislators to try to fill that gap between that public accountability in the whole need of judicial independence? At the same time, one has got to be very careful not to come across as too much of a hypocrite on this issue respecting judicial independence.
* (1710)
That is the reason why today, when I stand in my place, I think that there is probably more of a need--not probably, there is more of a need to have this independent review put into place, whether it means going abroad outside of the province in order to get individuals brought in, looking at individuals that have the expertise, that there may be in retirement, but there needs to be something that occurs that gets the public feedback, to lessen, to bridge that gap so we can restore more confidence into our judicial system.
I have felt quite frustrated in the sense that it seems that no matter what one attempts to do, it is very difficult to make any sort of significant headway in addressing this problem directly. That is one of the reasons why wanting to be able to contribute in a very positive way, I and I know other members of this Chamber, the member for St. Johns (Mr. Mackintosh), I believe, the member for River Heights (Mr. Radcliffe), from all political parties have gotten involved in the whole youth justice committees. I think that is a very strong, positive thing, because it is not just to be critical, but it is also to be able to contribute where we can. In fact, our justice committee now is looking at dealing with young offenders under the age of 12. It is on an experimental-type basis today. There has not been any sort of financial assistance at all from the government, but at least the government has been very receptive and open to the idea to the degree that there has been some significant improvement.
This is an area which I have been attempting to address on behalf of my constituents for the last few years. Over the number of months we have seen significant progress, even though at the beginning a couple of years ago it was getting to be a little bit frustrated.
Well, Madam Speaker, that is one example of what it is that we can do. There are other things. I am very pleased with Chief Cassels' public appearance that we need to expand the whole concept of community policing. I have had the opportunity to meet with Chief Cassels, shared my concerns with him with respect to the concept of community policing, and I was really pleased with what I heard him say. The idea of these police service stations where you have set hours in the districts in the city of Winnipeg and then you expand on that through community police patrols I think is very positive. I know that we have a local constable, Craig Waterman, who is just so well received in the areas in which he patrols, and the contribution has been very significant. There has been a high sense of co-operation from in particular the City of Winnipeg, the Province of Manitoba, in making this work. I like to believe that there has not been any sort of political interference. I think that Chief Cassels and the Winnipeg Police Service are the ones that deserve full credit for this idea, and I just stand and applaud their actions thus far in trust that they will continue to move forward, Madam Speaker.
I do believe there is a higher sense of need for the community to get more involved in safety-related issues. I would suggest that as elected officials, if there are things which we can do to promote more of that community involvement, we should be doing that, whether it is in the format of ad hoc safety groups or Neighborhood Watch programs, whatever can be done in terms of getting more people involved, ultimately, I believe is a positive thing.
A very strong personal opinion that I have is that there are, in particular in some areas of property crime, especially first-time offences--we need to take a look at alternatives to what is currently there today by again getting communities more involved. I would like to see more progressive action taken on that whole area, but when I look at the very first WHEREAS, where I talk about the citizens of Manitoba expect a process of judicial reform that reflects the commonly held belief that Manitobans who break the law should shoulder the consequences of their actions, I really do believe that Manitobans are, in fact, dissatisfied with what they are seeing today. My fear is that we, as legislators, do not use as an excuse judicial independence as a reason for not getting involved in making the changes that are necessary within our justice system.
We should respect it and go out of our way, perception-wise and in reality, to make sure that it is not unduly brought into a political realm, but there is a responsibility for us to make that bridge so that we can make the justice system more reflective to what the public as a whole want to see.
I would suggest to the government, because this resolution is just here to ensure that there is discussion about our justice system, that we will get some very positive feedback this afternoon on what it is that we can do, because I think there is a lot of work that needs to be done, and all communities in Manitoba would be better off if we did everything we could. Thank you.
Hon. James McCrae (Minister of Environment): Madam Speaker, I appreciate the sentiments which actuate the honourable member for Inkster this afternoon in placing before us Resolution 55 dealing with those issues that it does, which are so important to Manitobans and to all Canadians in this day and age. All throughout our history, I think, we have had a high regard for the concept of living safely and living peaceful lives free of the results of crime and wrongdoing.
The honourable member's main reason for wanting this placed before us today is that there could be a discussion about the issues, and I certainly appreciate that. As a former Minister of Justice in Manitoba, I had the privilege of discussing this on many, many occasions for a number of years and not just in this place but in church basements and community halls throughout the province of Manitoba. One thing I found on all of those occasions was that people attended meetings like that in large numbers because they care very much not only for their own safety and security and that of their property but also that of their children and their communities. So it is never a bad day to discuss the issues being raised today by the honourable member for Inkster (Mr. Lamoureux).
I notice in the resolution a reference to children under the age of 12, and, now, I know this resolution was put together--this is a little bit of scolding for the honourable member, but the resolution was put together before the more recent discussions in Ottawa, and it appears that even the very, very significant influence of the honourable member for Inkster could not be brought to bear on his federal colleagues.
* (1720)
He says he tried, and, you know, I have tried, too, for a long time in this area, and it is not that I have anything against children under the age of 12, because, obviously, I have fathered five of them and I understand about children, but some children, unfortunately, are used by people older than themselves. Knowing this law exists, protecting children under the age of 12, it is used by some people to further their own criminal aims, and, indeed, there are somewhat incorrigible youngsters who simply run out of resources that are available under Child and Family Services and those other things.
I suggest, as I am sure the honourable member for Inkster (Mr. Lamoureux) would, that if children younger than the age of 12 were included in the Young Offenders Act, it would be a fairly unusual or rare occurrence that the law might have to be used, but, nonetheless, are we going to tell those people in our society that we are totally powerless to do anything about their bad behaviour?
I do not think so, Madam Speaker, and I remember lobbying long and hard with federal authorities, to no avail unfortunately, but there were some improvements to the Young Offenders Act which beginning in 1989, shortly after '88, I guess it was, and my very first federal-provincial territorial meeting--it was held in Prince Edward Island, and I remember Gordon Pilkey, a man for whom I have great respect, who joined me--no, this would have been '89--as deputy Justice minister to attend a meeting in Prince Edward Island, and Manitoba, with Gordon's help I think led the way in the discussions in 1989.
Perhaps the changes that have happened since, although we do not suggest they go anywhere near far enough, we may have had some role in that, and if that is the case, I am proud of the achievements of Mr. Pilkey, and to some extent my own efforts were a part of that as well.
Well, there have been a lot of things happen since those days. We have had the honourable Minister of Culture (Mrs. Vodrey) and the present Minister of Justice (Mr. Toews) occupying the ministerial position in the Justice department carrying on the tradition of respect for human life and property and safety, and I am proud of all the things that we have done.
I have been consistent over the years in making sure that we say that until all criminal activity is totally wiped out, we still have work to do. So nobody is being smug about this, Madam Speaker, because that is exactly what the criminals want to see, is smugness on the part of lawmakers, that, you know, we have done as much as we can do and there you have it, because we have not done as much as we can do, and my colleague, the Attorney General, would be the first to agree with me, as would all honourable members, I am sure, as long as there is any crime remaining.
But I think that more should be done. I think Ottawa should be listening to the honourable member for Inkster (Mr. Lamoureux) and to me and others with respect to that particular WHEREAS in the honourable member's resolution today.
While I see in the RESOLVED section that the honourable member wants to have public hearings once again or all-party task forces and these sorts of things, in my respectful opinion we know very, very well what the opinions are of our neighbours and our fellow Manitobans with respect to crime. They have no time for it. They have simply seen too many headlines in the newspapers. Manitobans have seen too many examples of the laws that we have being flouted and too many examples where perhaps better enforcement might have made a difference.
Frankly, in the area I represent here, Manitoba Public Insurance, the Manitoba Public Insurance is partnered with police agencies to bring about safety on our streets and highways but, importantly, where we had an outright epidemic of car thefts going on, we have, through MPI, partnered with the City of Winnipeg Police to help in that particular area. Recent news coverage has pointed out that some success has been achieved. We want more success. As Minister responsible for MPI, I am quick to remind not only MPI but also the Winnipeg Police Service that we want more, more, more. We want more enforcement and we want to see some of these car-theft rings and gang activities brought under control. Little by little I think we are seeing that.
Now, the honourable Minister of Justice (Mr. Toews), if he were here, would probably--excuse me, Madam Speaker, I withdraw that comment. If the honourable Minister of Justice were able to do so, he would, I am sure, want today to be reminding honourable members that crime is one of the most pressing concerns of our country today, because this is something that he said recently in one of his many public statements. He said that crime is one of the most pressing concerns of our country today, but that does not mean that Manitobans are all just victims in waiting. We have taken steps to strengthen our crime prevention efforts, to increase community involvement in finding solutions, and we are making progress at many levels.
Perhaps the most important aspect of this progress is that the progress is measurable, Madam Speaker. Statistics Canada reports that break-ins have generally declined across the country since 1991. You know, some of the reasons for that is that people are doing something to make their communities safer. People are getting together with neighbours and community leaders to put together programs that make a difference. I recall very vividly visiting high school auditoriums in the southern part of the city of Winnipeg in those days and seeing hundreds of people coming out for crime prevention meetings.
The honourable member for Inkster (Mr. Lamoureux) is right. Those crime prevention meetings were successful because Winnipeg Police in those days and today were able to have community police officers. Those community police officers helped to organize activities in neighbourhoods, and the statistics just went wild in the right direction, Madam Speaker, in terms of preventing property crimes. Of course, the insurance companies were really interested in those results too, and of course the insurance companies got involved in those activities because indeed what it did is have the effect of reducing the number of claims for them, also keeps rates for insurance premiums under control. Everybody wins.
I remember, how many times did I say--maybe the honourable Minister of Health (Mr. Praznik) will probably be able to tell you exactly how many times I said that a crime prevented is a crime you do not have to go to the expense of prosecuting. How many? The Minister of Health does not remember, it was that many times, but that is okay, because it is an important point. There were also suggestions that a dollar spent on crime prevention effectively can save $7 in the justice system at the other end of it.
So, when I say we have got measurable progress, I mean that. Statistics Canada has reported that there has been a decline in break-ins. In Winnipeg, for example, we have seen a decrease of 26 percent in residential and 27 percent in business break-ins over this time. Why are we seeing this measurable decrease? Because Manitobans, like many other Canadians, are no longer willing to be complacent about crime, and they are getting involved.
Now, these things that the Minister of Justice (Mr. Toews) was saying was to an audience in Winnipeg, but he could have been saying it in an audience in Brandon or in Russell or in Souris or in any number of other areas where we have the activities of the youth justice committees, which the honourable member for Inkster (Mr. Lamoureux) has given his support to. Well, why would he not? Those are community-driven, community-based programs and, really, it lends strength to the principle that we need to look after our own communities, and we are.
While the government can be a partner in these things, and is, the people is what make the difference. People caring makes such a significant difference in the quality of our lives and the security that we enjoy in our towns and cities.
Certainly my community of Brandon is obviously no exception. We have excellent leadership at the level of the city council and leadership at the level of the police department in terms of crime prevention. Over the years, the people at the Brandon police service, who have been assigned the job of community relations and crime prevention, have been doing an excellent job in getting people to work together and come together. For example, in the area of impaired driving and countermeasures, Brandon has joined Winnipeg and The Pas and now, I think, there is another community in Manitoba as well next year that will have Operation Red Nose in effect.
* (1730)
Well, I know some of the honourable members here were involved in Operation Red Nose this past year, and I mean on the volunteer end of that particular program. You meet the most interesting people when you are working out on Operation Red Nose. Actually, it is a little bit comical, but on the other hand it is also excellent, because people are able to enjoy themselves at their social functions, safe in the knowledge that they are going to be driven home by responsible people and their car is going to arrive home, too.
Now, these are the sorts of things that truly make a difference. Operation Red Nose can make statistics available, and have done so, about the success of their program. But it is people getting together to help out other people in making sure that our communities are safe.
Now, I could go on and on and on about the things that have been said by the Attorney General and done by him, his department, and all their partners over the past number of years. It really amounts to a very significant effort on the part of virtually thousands of people in Manitoba. We support the concepts behind the honourable member's motion. We know very well what the current concerns of the people are. I would be bringing this resolution to the direct attention of the Attorney General for his consideration; would take the honourable member's resolution as a representation to the Minister of Justice, but there is certainly no argument on this side of the House about what it is that is driving the honourable member for Inkster (Mr. Lamoureux) in bringing this forward. I commend him for doing so.
Mr. Gord Mackintosh (St. Johns): It appears from the introductory remarks of the member for Inkster (Mr. Lamoureux) that he is not pursuing the idea of an all-party task force anymore, but he does call for an independent review of the legal system or the justice system, I understand. Therefore, I take the resolution as a matter for general discussion on the need to better address the threat of crime and violence in the Manitoba community.
I look at the RESOLVED clause, and I see in there two underlying assumptions. The first is that in Manitoba we are not doing well in dealing with crime. The second is that it is important that we embrace public views and that we involve the public in redesigning our justice system. Those are two assumptions that we certainly support and agree with.
Manitoba is not doing well in dealing with crime. As the members opposite know, Manitoba leads the provinces in having the unfortunate distinction of having the highest violent crime rate. Indeed, in every year since 1993, I believe that has been the case. Included in those years is the unfortunate distinction of having the worst violent crime rate in Canadian history right here in our province.
I know Manitobans feel that the friendly Manitoba they have come to know and love is slipping away on them. Anecdotes, as the member for Inkster (Mr. Lamoureux) has shared with us, of the woman in Portage la Prairie is not any more an uncommon result of not only crime itself but the fear of crime.
Manitobans are bunkering in. They are changing their patterns of behaviour because of this fear and this threat. I shared with the Legislature not long ago an anecdote from an inner city youth worker who said that families in her neighbourhood were now changing the way they were sitting and sleeping in their homes. They were positioning themselves away from their front window, for example. They were sitting up against walls and sleeping in different places because of the fear of gangs, in particular, in that neighbourhood.
No, we are not doing well in Manitoba, Madam Speaker. It has been our assertion that the current administration in Manitoba over the last 10 years has worsened the conditions that have bred this crime rate and this tragedy. You know, there is a cause and effect to government policy. We know full well the cause and effect of the shutting down of every nickel of funding to the friendship centres of Manitoba. Just last night, Madam Speaker, an individual came up to me to lament the loss of the youth workers at the Winnipeg Friendship Centre on Robinson as a result of the government's funding cut. That individual said there was a loss of nine youth workers. I would call them crime prevention workers; people who provided mentorship. After all, every youth must have a nurturing adult in their life, a mentor, hopefully a parent, but the friendship centre provided a mentor. The friendship centre provided organized programs, provided a safe place, provided some structure.
I, in my heart, know that the loss of the the recreational opportunities, the hope and the sense of place for inner city aboriginal youth as a result of the cuts to the friendship centre is one of many factors that have bred the crime rate that we are suffering particularly in the city of Winnipeg. But, Madam Speaker, it is much bigger than that. Justice Hughes, for example, in looking at the Headingley riot, talked about what he called the real solution. He said we must offer recreational opportunities, supports for families at risk and get serious about marketable skills and job prospects for those at risk of gang activity, and he urged that Manitoba take a lead in moving that to the national agenda. He said we have to put safety of persons on the same pedestal as health and education.
I have not seen any tangible result stemming from that recommendation. All I have seen are further cuts, and whether it is even the Minister of Justice (Mr. Toews) killing the Night Hoops program for inner city basketball, how they turned their back on the closing of the North Y, how they have reduced funding for foster parents, how they have made changes in the social allowances that have disproportionately affected children, changes to the daycare system a number of years ago, and, most significantly, even now the Premier (Mr. Filmon) makes vague reference how this government has seemed determined over the last 10 years to ensure that certain Manitobans--and they have been disproportionately aboriginal peoples--have been left out of the economy. There is a cause and effect, Madam Speaker.
Having created those conditions, the government that is currently in office has failed to take meaningful rear guard action then to deal with the crime that has been the fallout. That is where the second assumption in the RESOLVED clause comes in.
We all know how important it is to have public input. Some of the best ideas that I have heard and many that I have espoused come from kitchen tables in my constituency, come from persons sitting next to me on the bus in the morning; they come from public forums. People out there understand that we have a serious challenge that has to be dealt with and to deal with it we have to rejig the justice system.
Over the last number of years and in the course of the term of this government, there have been many, many studies done of how the justice system in Manitoba can better deal with the challenges of crime. I am not buoyed by the government's response to the recommendations. I could get into individual inquest reports, and I can think right now of several where the recommendations have gone unheard by this government.
* (1740)
I think back first of all to the War on Drugs report, a report that the government never even so much as released to the public. I am not aware of any recommendations that were acted on from that report. I think back to the Pedlar report on domestic violence--and we all know what happened there--many of those recommendations remain outstanding. I think of the Aboriginal Justice Inquiry, reading that I would commend to all Manitobans not just for the recommendations but for the insights that it offers Manitobans into aboriginal culture and the challenges that they face, particularly in the justice system. I have often said that it is one of the darkest clouds over this government: that it has rejected the recommendations in the main in that report.
I think of the reports from the Child and Youth Secretariat, for example, the one dealing with gangs, the one dealing with prostitution that have fallen on deaf ears. Here are the government's own studies. I think of the Hughes report. I already mentioned that, and now the Lavoie report. While we still have hope that the essence of the Lavoie report recommendations will be implemented, we now are getting indications that some of the main ideas and urgings from Mr. Justice Schulman are being rejected by the government as we speak.
I know the member for Inkster (Mr. Lamoureux) urges consideration of an independent inquiry of the justice system, but we also recognize of course that the justice system has many, many aspects, and many aspects of the system have been studied. That is not to say that we are opposed to further study, but what we are saying is that to embark on further studies will require a commitment by the government that they will begin to take the safety of Manitobans as seriously as their tough talks suggest. We have seen time after time how this government has failed in its administration of justice.
Now, we have not just put forward criticisms and sat down. I think for every criticism that we have raised, we have put forward positive alternatives. I think, for example, of the Gang Action Plan, an 18-point plan, a comprehensive plan to deal with the threat of street gangs in Manitoba. We know that over the course of this government, street gang membership has grown in Winnipeg alone to about 1,400. We know that under this government how we have seen the new threat of home invasions arise. We have seen under this government the epidemic of auto thefts. We have seen the horrendous increase of robberies in Manitoba, a statistic unfortunately and a happening that is driving the violent crime statistics in this province.
We have seen the increase in offensive weapons violations, and yet, even though Manitobans have said to this government in prebudget polling that one of their top priorities, in fact I believe it was the top priority, was a comprehensive, preventative program to deal with gangs. Yet this government ignored that, brought in a budget that did not so much as mention the word "gangs," throne speech after throne speech that does not even so much as mention the word "gangs."
This month in a national magazine Manitoba is embarrassed by again being reminded that this is the gang capital of Canada. Well, we have put forward positive alternatives, and it is not everything to everybody, but there is a good starting point there, but the reaction of the government was, well, we have done all that, this is nonsense. That was put forward in a positive way, not at an election time. It was put forward to plant the seeds for meaningful action to protect our safety, and it was scoffed at.
We have put forward alternatives to deal with graffiti. We have a victims' rights bill before the House that members have now been able to look at and compare to the government's bill, and the government's bill falls far, far short. We have put forward positive alternatives to deal with solvent abuse, to deal with a pattern of concerns and prosecutions.
With regard to judges, just before the minister was musing about accountability of judges, we were on open-line radio talking about that. I wonder where they got their ideas. We have put forward positive alternatives to deal more effectively with domestic violence. In fact, with community partnership, we demanded the Lavoie inquiry. We asked what ever happened to The Crime Prevention Foundation Act, why that legislation from the Pawley administration was never proclaimed by the government. We have put forward proposals. We have consulted the public. For example, on the Gang Action Plan we had about 10 meetings throughout Winnipeg, in particular, and elsewhere to get feedback. With the victims' bill of rights, we consulted victims far and wide. On the graffiti legislation that we are developing, we are consulting still.
We would urge the government to get serious about our safety. Look at the options that have already been presented. Look for more. We urge the government to listen to Manitobans. Start listening to their plea for greater safety.
So, in essence, I support the underlying assumptions in the RESOLVED clause and in a positive way urge the government, please start paying attention, and when you get those poll results about preventing gang activity, take action. Do not ignore the problem. It hurts.
Mr. Mervin Tweed (Turtle Mountain): It certainly is a pleasure for me to rise and make some comments in regard to the resolution that has been put forward from the member for Inkster (Mr. Lamoureux). I have read the resolution. I listened to what he said, and, as is often the case, he certainly identified some of the concerns and many of the concerns that are facing, I think, all Manitobans and is a concern of all the people of the province.
It is different for me in the sense of having grown up in a small community. When we talk, particularly about youth crime and the ways that we deal with it, I am not that old that I cannot remember my childhood. I remember as a child doing some of the things that we considered to be very--I do not want to use the word--scallywag, I guess, or some of the troubles that we used to get into that we thought at the time would have been termed a major crime in a small community, and that might have been a very small potato. [interjection] Exactly, as the member stated, garden raids and things like that. I can also remember, Madam Speaker, that--
An Honourable Member: How much trouble did you get into in Medora?
Mr. Tweed: Well, it is a small community. I think probably one of the greatest things that I have as a memory of growing up was the fact that it was a small community. It was a small community where everybody looked out and took care of each other and each other's interests.
I think of how things have evolved today and some of the major, major crimes that I see young children committing today and how awful those things are. If kids of that age are committing those kind of crimes, just the thought of it upsets me to no end. Because, as I say, when I relate back to my own experiences, if you did something to hurt someone in your community, be it an act of carelessness or with intent or it got out of hand or got further than we expected it to, the community dealt with it. They dealt with you in a very serious manner.
* (1750)
I can remember as a young kid that I was not so afraid of the community as I was when I got home because I knew it was going to be worse than that. We were always taken back into the community to the people that we had offended in some way, and we were made to deal with it. The adults in our community, I often think that they used to have a plan that this is how they got us to become more responsible, because it only took a couple of lessons. We learned that respect and the responsibility that comes with growing up is not something that you should take lightly. The respect for other people in your community and the things you do are always going to be reflected.
I know when I go back to my old community of Medora, many people remind me of some of the things that I did as a child. Although by today's standards they would not even be considered crimes, it just reminds me of that. I think of my own children who are in their teens. We have moved to a larger centre, and we have really tried to emphasize in our particular neighbourhood that everybody will look out and be responsible for each other's children for their families. I often say to my son: I do not really have to know what time you got home, because somebody in the neighbourhood will tell me the next day. So it does create a little bit of a responsibility on him to maintain some responsibility.
Unfortunately, I think what is lacking in a lot of our young people today is--whether it is a single-parent family, I know a lot of the difficulties with two parents in the household--to be there all the time for your children, or to be there at the time that they particularly need you. I know with this job, it takes me away from home a lot. In a short period of time of four of five days, you can lose touch with your children as to what they are doing and what they are involved in. If you do not take the time and make the time and the effort to sit down and try and catch up to what they are doing, you can fall out of the picture very quickly.
I get back to the idea of community and neighbourhoods and values that we all share or try and put out front so that our children can see. It gives me some reassurance that some of the things that are happening in the province of Manitoba in the justice system are heading the right way and, I think, will eventually bear the fruits that we hoped that it would, but I do believe that the community has that responsibility. I often think of my past few years. I coached kids' hockey and baseball and other things that they participated in, and I can remember hounding this one kid pretty well for the whole winter just to do up his jacket when he went outside. He would always give me that kind of a distant look, but by the end of year I think he understood that I was not doing it to embarrass him or do anything; it was just that I had a concern about him. He was a young guy that was always out roaming the streets, and I would pick him up and take him home. He always kind of looked at me, thinking, why are you doing this? It was just simply because his parents and I had communicated with each other and that was the nature of this guy. We just had an agreement that if I saw him out there, or if they saw my child on the street, we would pick him up and make sure that he got home, particularly late at night.
I think that this job has opened up the opportunity for me, particularly, to see--a lot of the communities that I represent are 300, 400, 500 people in the communities, and they have really taken and made the effort to take this upon themselves to become responsible for the justice that is in their communities. In a lot of cases, the RCMP are anywhere from a half hour to an hour away, and quite often when something takes place in these communities, if it is dealt with immediately and it is dealt with responsibly, I think our children have a tremendous opportunity to learn and learn without necessarily the intervention of law as such.
I think that is quite often how our young children get a bad impression of what police officers do and what their purpose is because quite often in today's world they only see the police officer when they are in trouble. I know that in rural Manitoba, particularly in my area that I am speaking of, the police officers have made a real attempt, and I believe a very good success rate, of going to communities, communicating with our young people, talking to them about the laws, and I know that they feel very comfortable with our police and do not see them as the enemy or the opposition. They see them as maybe a partner or as a friend.
I think back in the community of Deloraine, they had a corporal there that had been there for about five years, Barry Dalrymple, and he got to be such good friends with the kids in the community, the parents. We all could sit down and discuss things together. In a lot of cases, crime came up in our discussions, how we would deal with it, what we would do. But he was transferred out in August of--I cannot remember the year, but I can remember the kids were graduating from high school that June, the Grade 12 class, and they asked him to be their guest speaker.
We had talked about it, and he gave a wonderful presentation on responsibility. He talked about his experiences with the kids, but the one thing that kind of struck me as odd, and he showed me a letter that he had received from the commanding officer, and it was one of the first times in the commanding officer's history, that he could remember, that an RCMP officer had been invited to speak at a graduation. I think that is unfortunate, because, until our children become comfortable and understand that these people are out there to help us, to protect us, but also to be a part of our community and a part of our community's lives, that was not going to happen.
I often think very fondly of that because I remember sitting and listening to his presentation to these kids. They all sat and listened to every word that he had to say, and it was because they respected him and because he had taken the effort and time to be their friend, but also be the person that was respected for his job and the job that he had to do. There was no question about it, he would do his job when it was called upon, but he was also somebody that treated everybody fairly and with respect and in return earned that respect.
I think that the resolution that has been brought forward reflects that, and I think it is a good resolution. I really do. I do not think that anyone could disagree with the things that the member for Inkster (Mr. Lamoureux) has said, and I--
Madam Speaker: Order, please. When this matter is again before the House, the honourable member for Turtle Mountain will have five minutes remaining.
The hour being 6 p.m., this House is adjourned and stands adjourned until 1:30 p.m. tomorrow (Wednesday).