September 19, 1996 (35th Parliament, 2nd Session)

REF

Jack Ramsay

Reform

Mr. Jack Ramsay (Crowfoot, Ref.)

Madam Speaker, I am always interested to hear the member from Newfoundland speak.
He spoke of extremism. We have seen extremism in this country for the last 25 years. We have seen the extremism in the fiscal monetary policy that has created a $600 billion debt in this country. We have the extremism result in a $50 billion interest payment each year on that debt. We have seen the extremism of the MP pension plan which is not a pension plan at all but a winning lottery ticket.
We have seen the extremism of section 745 that allows first degree murderers like Clifford Olson to apply for early parole after serving just 15 years and take everyone of those 11 families whose children have been murdered through the horror, pain and the anguish again and again.
We see the extremism of politicians who support those kind of rights and protection for the murderers in this country while ignoring completely the duty and responsibility to protect the innocent victims of the children of those families.
Yes, this country has had to be subjected to extremism, extremism that I have talked about, which we could speak about for hours in this House; extremism of the Young Offenders Act that is considered to be a joke by many of the young offenders them-
selves; a justice system that cannot protect the lives and the property of our citizens. Yes, we have extremism in this country and it is the result of people like my colleague who just addressed us.
We can talk of something the hon. member did not address with a democracy as expressed within our committees. I sat on the justice committee and I saw one of the finest chairman who knew the rules, who was an experienced capable man and who was fair to both the government side as well as the opposition. I saw that hon. member fired from his position simply because he chose to represent what he thought was in the best interests of his people on a government bill.
The hon. member has not addressed that. Perhaps he could address that in the time he has left. What does he think about the hon. member for Notre-Dame-de-Grâce being treated in that horrible manner by a so-called democratic process and a government that is supposedly sworn to uphold the democratic principles of this country? Let us hear the hon. member respond to what happened to this hon. member over here.

Topic:   Routine Proceedings
Subtopic:   Committees Of The House
Full View