Alice Wong, MP » 2009

Queen Elizabeth II Diamond Jubilee Medal

Information on the Queen Elizabeth II Diamond Jubilee Medal can be found at the Governor General's website by clicking here.

Nominations are being accepted by Alice Wong and the application form can be found by clicking here.

Parliament for 2012

The House of Commons is back in session from January 30, 2012. The calendar of sitting days for the House can be found by clicking here.

If you are a resident of the Richmond constituency and have comments on Federal government policy, do not hesitate to contact us.

Richmond Electoral District

Alice Wong is the Member of Parliament for Richmond. The Richmond electoral district has a population of 114,137 based on 2006 census data. The Richmond electoral district contains approximately two-thirds of the population of the entire City of Richmond. You can view a map of Richmond by clicking here.

Prior Content

Search

Links

Members’ Statement on Rainer Mehl

October 23, 2009

On October 23, Alice Wong made a Members’ statement on the Prime Minister’s Teaching Excellence Awards, one of which was awarded to the Richmond resident of Rainer Mehl.

The player will show in this paragraph

The following is a transcript:

Mrs. Alice Wong (Richmond, CPC):
Mr. Speaker, earlier this month, the Prime Minister’s Awards for Teaching Excellence were announced and one award went to my constituent, Rainer Mehl.

Mr. Mehl is a teacher of animation, photography and graphic arts at Kitsilano Secondary School. His passion for photography began early. He built his first darkroom at the age of 11 and operated his own photography business in high school and university.

His passion for photography builds on his experience to bring practical and experience-based teaching to his classroom.

One example of his outstanding achievements is that Mr. Mehl guided students to revamp a black and white yearbook that was losing money and turn it into a professional quality production that earns enough profit to buy new technology for the school’s photography classes.

I would like to congratulate Mr. Mehl on obtaining this award for teaching excellence. Richmond is proud of him.

Comments Off

Debate on Bill C-52 – Sentencing for Fraud

October 23, 2009

On October 22, 2009, Alice Wong debated Bill C-52. The following is a transcript:

Mrs. Alice Wong (Parliamentary Secretary for Multiculturalism, CPC):

Madam Speaker, I am pleased to have the opportunity to speak on the subject of Bill C-52, An Act to amend the Criminal Code (sentencing for fraud). The bill contains a number–

Some hon. members: Oh, oh!

[Translation]

[Table of Contents]

The Acting Speaker (Ms. Denise Savoie):

I would ask the hon. members who want to pursue the debate to go to the other side and leave the House.

[English]

[Table of Contents]

Mrs. Alice Wong:

Madam Speaker, the bill contains a number of provisions that are designed to ensure that people who devise serious fraud offences receive tougher sentences. The objective of the bill is clear and simple. It would amend the Criminal Code to improve the justice system’s response to the sort of large scale fraud we have all been hearing so much about lately.

New Canadians are among those who are vulnerable to fraud. They choose to come to Canada because they trust our justice system. They believe that those who commit crimes will be sentenced and put behind bars. However, when they unfortunately become victims of fraudsters they are appalled to discover that these criminals can easily walk away without any serious consequences and start committing those same crimes again. The victims cannot get their hard-earned money back and there is no protection for them.

Bill C-52 would send a message to those who think they can outsmart Canadians and dupe them into handing over their hard-earned savings. On the contrary, the bill would make clear that fraud is a serious crime for which there must be serious consequences.

It is also designed to improve the responsiveness of the justice system for victims of fraud. These proposed measures would send a strong message to the victims of fraud that the crimes committed against them are serious and the harms they suffer would be taken into account and addressed to the greatest degree possible.

Overall, the measures in the bill would do much to increase Canadians’ confidence in the justice system.

I would like to speak for a while about the restitution element of the bill. Restitution is defined as the return or restoration of some specific thing to its rightful owner. It is distinct from compensation which in the Canadian legal system is a scheme of payments managed and made by provincial or territorial governments to assist victims of crime. Restitution is the payment by the offender of an amount established by the court. The Criminal Code currently provides for restitution for criminal offences including: damages for the loss or destruction of property, bodily or psychological harm, bodily harm or threat to a spouse or child.

An order for restitution is made during the sentencing hearing of a convicted offender. It is part of the overall sentence provided to an offender as a stand-alone measure, or as part of a probation order or a conditional sentence.

Restitution orders may be particularly appropriate in the case of fraud offences. In several recent high profile cases we hear from media accounts of thousands of dollars taken by offenders. These shocking cases of duplicity have deprived many innocent Canadians of hard-earned savings and in truly awful cases of retirement funds. It will be a decision in each trial as to whether restitution will be appropriate.

(1710)

Our proposals provide that in the case of fraud the sentencing judge must consider an order of restitution as part of the overall sentence for the offender. The court shall inquire of the Crown if reasonable steps have been taken to provide victims with the opportunity to indicate whether they are seeking restitution. This step will ensure that sentencing cannot happen without victims having had the opportunity to speak to the Crown and establish their losses.

The courts have found that it is not possible to make an order when the amount is not readily ascertainable or when it is difficult to apportion the amount among several victims. To further assist victims our proposals include an optional form to assist victims in setting out their losses. The form identifies the victims, their losses and clarifies that the victims need to provide receipts, bills or estimates in order to assist the court in making the restitution order. In all cases these losses must be readily ascertainable.

Put together, these proposals will increase the likelihood of orders of restitution being made. It is our hope that these proposals will increase the responsiveness of the legal system to victims of fraud.

I would note that the Federal Ombudsman for Victims of Crime recommended improvements to the restitution scheme in one of his first recommendations to the Minister of Justice. These proposals, while not as exhaustive as the ombudsman urged are steps along the road of improving the experience of victims in the justice system.

This morning a member opposite asked what the government is doing to prevent offenders from committing further crimes. Canadians are deeply troubled by the possibility that convicted offenders will be able to resume their activities and defraud yet other Canadians.

To address concerns about the potential for repeated behaviour, the bill includes a new sentencing measure which allows the sentencing court to order that a person convicted of fraud should be prohibited from having employment or engaging in volunteer activities that involve having authority over other people’s money, real estate or other valuable securities. The court could prohibit the offender from engaging in such conduct for any length of time it considers appropriate, including any period during which the offender is serving a prison sentence. Breach of the prohibition order would be a separate offence.

By preventing the offender from having the opportunity to commit another fraud, the bill would help to minimize the further victimization of Canadians.

There are several prohibition orders already in the Criminal Code, such as the one which can be imposed on someone convicted of sexual offences against children, prohibiting them, among other things, from working in schools or other places where they would be in a position of trust or authority over young people.

I am confident the measures in this bill will help send a strong message to the fraudsters out there that their time is up. I am also pleased that the bill can act as a springboard for discussion and raising awareness about fraud more generally.

I hope all hon. members will support the bill and help to ensure it is passed into law as quickly as possible.

(1715)

[Table of Contents]

Mr. John Cannis (Scarborough Centre, Lib.):

Madam Speaker, the hon. member so eloquently talked about what we have to do to protect our citizens or people in general who get defrauded. She talked about restitution and all that in the bill. Yesterday we were debating another crime bill and how we get the judiciary to enforce it. We talked about mandatory sentencing.

I want to ask the member simply this. We have heard the story over again. We could sit here as legislators and draw up the best legislation and so on. What is in this piece of legislation that will enforce the law, for example, that will guide the judiciary to put penalties to bring these people to justice and to get justice for the victims? What provisions are in this piece of legislation which will do that to help these people?

[Table of Contents]

Mrs. Alice Wong:

Madam Speaker, I have said quite clearly that the bill does provide the judicial system and the judge, the court, with the ability to do so, because when they do the sentencing, they have to look at that possibility and also provide the victim with the possibility to apply for restitution.

Then we also facilitate those victims. Very often we only protect the criminals. We always forget the victims. In this bill we protect the victims because their money was taken. They were cheated out of their money and had to suffer, without any means of getting their money back. This bill handles that exactly.

[Translation]

[Table of Contents]

Mr. Roger Pomerleau (Drummond, BQ):

Madam Speaker, we have spoken at length today—and some colleagues did so before me—about criminality in the United States as an example for what we should do here. We know that in the United States, much harsher sentences are given to many more people. Their prisons are full and yet their crime rate is at its highest.

I have always thought to myself that often in the United States much harsher sentences are given for fraud and money matters than for attacks against individuals. For example, Al Capone was locked up, not for the murders he committed, but for the taxes he failed to pay. All that because Eliot Ness’s team that was investigating him, there were some very good accountants. It is a good example of what we want or need here and that is for police services to be specialized today with accountants to properly pursue people who commit fraud.

I think my colleague should acknowledge, in light of the U.S. system, that there is no real correlation between being tough on crime and reducing the crime rate. That is what I would like her to address.

(1720)

[English]

[Table of Contents]

Mrs. Alice Wong:

Madam Speaker, we have a very unique situation here where for too long we have been protecting criminals.

When we talk about prisons, in other words, we could just look at the costs without realizing that we have to look at the victims. There are the social costs to the victims. They have lost their hard-earned money, especially those who have lost their pension income. Their lives depend on that.

We can never really belittle the seriousness of those crimes and compare them to those who attack people physically. I think there are other means of handling those other issues which are in other areas. The Conservative Party is the only party which works hard to bring forth tough measures to fight all crimes. Unfortunately, we do not get all the support from the opposition.

I am hoping that this time, from now on, members opposite will really honour Canadians by acknowledging that this is a special situation where we are doing things in our own Canadian way.

[Table of Contents]

Mr. Paul Dewar (Ottawa Centre, NDP):

Madam Speaker, I want to respond to a couple of things the parliamentary secretary said. It is one thing to go after criminals and those who have taken advantage of people, and of course people want to see that happen, but the problem we are having is the approach the government is taking.

White collar crime is not new to the NDP. We have been after this since the arc. We have to take a look at propositions because the government does not look at the regulatory options

If we are to go after the perpetrators after the crime is done, the money is gone. They have stuffed it away somewhere. We have seen this time and time again. We have to go after regulations. We have to make sure we follow the money when it comes to getting serious about it.

The hon. member is talking about pensions. There were 4,000 on the lawn of Parliament Hill yesterday and the government said, “Sorry, too bad, so sad”. What is the government doing about those people? What will it do seriously about that because there is a deficit in fairness for them.

We could go on talking and saying we will crack down on white collar crime, which is great, but what will you do to get to the root of it, to get to the people who have basically taken the money that people have worked for their whole lives and stuffed it somewhere else? You will not get that money after these guys have been caught. You have to get it before. What is your government doing about that?

[Table of Contents]

The Acting Speaker (Ms. Denise Savoie):

I am sure that the hon. member is not talking about my government, but I will ask the hon. parliamentary secretary to respond.

[Table of Contents]

Mrs. Alice Wong:

Madam Speaker, I find it very disturbing for the member opposite to compare the private pension to fraud. Is he suggesting that it is the company’s desire to cheat its employees right from the beginning? I find that very disturbing.

However, let us get back to the bill. The bill provides the court with the authority to provide restitution, to restore the money that these people have lost. This can be done. They can be given the means to chase their money. The judges could freeze some of the properties or money of the people that have allegedly been charged.

There are similar situations when people are prohibited from leaving the country because of crime. I am sure that these elements could be possible if the House decides that other measures are needed. I am sure that those could be done. It does not stop us from passing the bill. Without these tools, the judges simply cannot do this.

(1725)

[Table of Contents]

The Acting Speaker (Ms. Denise Savoie):

There is one minute left. I will ask the member for Eglinton—Lawrence to ask a very brief question.

[Table of Contents]

Hon. Joseph Volpe (Eglinton—Lawrence, Lib.):

Madam Speaker, I guess everybody would be in agreement that, when a crime is committed and proven, those who perpetrate the crime should suffer the appropriate indignities and commit to the appropriate restitution in order to mitigate some, if not all, of the damage that they have committed.

However, the most important issue in terms of fighting crime, because I think that is what the House intends by this kind of legislation, is to put in place the mechanisms in order to prevent such things from happening. In other words, what are the deterrents that are put in place? What are the investigative authorities? How many police are in place? How many Crown attorneys and other judges are put in place so that there can be an appropriate investigation and a quick determination of justice?

Where is that in this bill?

[Table of Contents]

The Acting Speaker (Ms. Denise Savoie):

I would like to give the parliamentary secretary 30 seconds to respond to that.

[Table of Contents]

Mrs. Alice Wong:

Madam Speaker, I think that the best response right now is to pass the bill first and then look at the mechanism. It is wrong to put the cart before the horse. The horse has to come first. This is exactly what we are asking. Pass the bill and then let us work on it together.

[Table of Contents]

Comments Off

Funding for Flood Protection in Richmond

October 19, 2009

A lot of people, especially new residents, do not know that the elevation of the City of Richmond averages around one meter above sea level. This creates some logistical challenges, especially with flood control. Investing in our dikes and drainage systems will help. The price of flood prevention is well worth it. When the infrastructure is doing its job, Richmond continues to function. Only when there is a failure of flood control infrastructure do we tend to notice the infrastructure’s lack of presence.

The best analogy would be a car engine – when you see the “Check engine oil” light turn on, chances are your engine has already taken on some damage. Likewise, we want to make sure that Richmond’s “Check engine oil” light is never turned on, and we do this by making sure our flood protection infrastructure is well maintained.

====================

GOVERNMENTS FUND MORE THAN $7 MILLION IN RICHMOND FLOOD PROTECTION

RICHMOND – Canada, B.C. and the City of Richmond have approved a joint investment of nearly $7.2 million through the Building Canada Fund and Infrastructure Stimulus Fund. The projects at the Middle Arm Dike and No. 4 Road Drainage Pump Station will provide lasting flood protection for the area and create local jobs.

“Aging infrastructure is a serious, ongoing problem for all municipalities,” says Richmond MP Alice Wong. “The Government of Canada realizes the important role we need to play in funding the necessary upgrades to the No. 4 Road Pump Station and the Fraser River Middle Arm Dike. Flood Protection is such an essential task.”

“This is another example of creating good jobs through infrastructure projects,” says Richmond-Steveston MLA John Yap. “These projects are a great investment in public safety and another strong boost to Richmond’s economy.”

“We were elected to get B.C. through this recession stronger than ever,” says Richmond Centre MLA Rob Howard. “That’s exactly what these types of investments will accomplish. We’re also bringing long-term improvements to our local infrastructure in the process.”

“Each new job is hugely important,” says Richmond East MLA Linda Reid. “They’re important for the people getting back to work. They’re important for the families of these workers. And they’re important for local businesses.”

Combined Federal, Provincial and Municipal funds will provide $4,810,000 for work at the No. 4 Road Drainage Pump Station. This project will conduct a major renovation of an existing drainage pump station and double its current pumping capacity. The upgrades to the station include construction and modification of the existing wet well, construction of a new motor control centre and generator building. The project also includes architectural enhancements and general site restoration and landscaping.

All three levels of government will also provide $2,387,845 for Phase 2 of the Fraser River Middle Arm Dike Upgrade. Approximately 755 linear metres of the dike between Cambie Road and Hollybridge Way will be upgraded. This upgrade will include raising the dike approximately half a metre, increasing the riprap armouring on the river face, and the construction of concrete floodwall retaining structures to act as a flood barrier.

“Upgrading Richmond’s perimeter flood protection is a high priority for our island city,” said Richmond Mayor Malcolm Brodie. “The City’s dikes and drainage pump stations are fundamental for flood protection and these improvements will help ensure we remain safe from the threat of flood when water levels rise as a result of severe weather, extreme tides or high spring runoffs.”

These projects build on a recent infrastructure funding announcement of more than $10.2 million by Canada, B.C. and the City of Richmond for sewer upgrades and water main replacement.

The Government of Canada’s 2009 Economic Action Plan includes a vast array of initiatives to help to stimulate the economy, create jobs, build consumer confidence, and assist Canadians when they need it most during this global economic recession. New large-scale infrastructure programs are one important element of this plan.

The project is funded under the Province’s three-year, $14-billion capital infrastructure program that will create up to 88,000 jobs and help build vital public infrastructure in every region of B.C.

Since October 2008, some 655 projects worth $4.1 billion have been announced. The projects approved to date are expected to create more than 26,000 direct jobs over three years

For more information on the Building Canada plan, visit www.buildingcanada.gc.ca or www.bcbuildingcanadafundcommunities.ca. Information on the Infrastructure Stimulus Fund is available at www.creatingjobs.gc.ca.

To find out more about how the Government of Canada and CMHC are working to build stronger homes and communities for all Canadians, call CMHC at 1-800-668-2642 or visit www.cmhc.ca/housingactionplan. For more information on Canada’s Economic Action Plan, call 1-800-O Canada or visit www.actionplan.gc.ca.

Comments Off

Social Housing Funding for Richmond

October 14, 2009

RICHMOND SOCIAL HOUSING BENEFITS FROM B.C. – CANADA PARTNERSHIP

RICHMOND – The Governments of Canada and British Columbia are investing more than $4 million in Richmond social housing through a cost-shared Housing Renovation Partnership (HRP). This joint agreement provides funding to renovate and retrofit social housing in greatest need of repair, creating an estimated 25 jobs.

“We’re realizing two important aims with this partnership,” says Richmond East MLA Linda Reid. “We’re revitalizing social housing and creating jobs at a time when our economy needs a boost.”

“The life of these homes will be extended by years,” says Richmond-Steveston MLA John Yap. “Through these two projects we are building on our investments in both social housing and economic stimulus.”

“I’m very pleased to see us enhancing the quality of life for residents of Rosewood Towers and Rosewood Village,” says Richmond Centre MLA Rob Howard. “Safeguarding existing social housing also helps to keep housing affordable.”

“This is a win-win situation,” says Richmond MP Alice Wong. “Not only will this funding improve the availability and affordability of social housing in Richmond, but at the same time these construction projects will increase employment and stimulate our local economy. Such multiple benefit scenarios as this are at the very heart of the federal government’s Economic Action Plan.”

The Rosewood Towers and Rosewood Village social housing developments will receive a total of $4,035,286 for repairs and renovations:

* Rosewood Towers will receive $3,338,786 for work to increase residents’ safety through improvements to the site (such as improved lighting), measures to enhance energy efficiency, as well as installing new windows.
* Rosewood Village will receive $696,500 for work to improve energy efficiency.

Of the total $176.76 million announced, the majority of the funding, $163.7 million will be directed toward repairs at 81 social housing developments. The remainder of the funding, $13.06 million is being allocated to renovations that are underway at provincially-owned Single Room Occupancy (SRO) hotels.
The funding was made available as a result of a $365-million joint investment under an amendment to the Canada-British Columbia Affordable Housing Agreement which includes funding through Canada’s Economic Action Plan and by the Government of British Columbia.

This new initiative is part of an overall $14-billion capital infrastructure program launched by the Province that will create up to 88,000 jobs over three years and help build vital public infrastructure in every region of the province.

Through Housing Matters BC, the Province is addressing a range of housing needs, from homelessness to affordable rental housing and homeownership. In 2009, the provincial housing budget is approximately $450 million, more than three times as much as in 2001. To find out more about affordable housing in B.C., visit www.bchousing.org.

Comments Off

Members’ Statement on China’s 60th birthday

October 2, 2009

On October 1, 2009, Alice Wong made a members’ statement on the 60th year since the founding of the People’s Republic of China:

The player will show in this paragraph

Mrs. Alice Wong (Richmond, CPC):

Mr. Speaker, today marks the 60th anniversary of the establishment of the People’s Republic of China.

In Canada, there are many individuals and families of Chinese heritage who proudly call Canada their home. Chinese Canadians have played a significant role in shaping Canada into the nation we are so proud of today, from the construction of the Canadian Pacific Railway to serving in the Canadian armed forces.

In my riding of Richmond, over half the population is of ethnic Chinese descent. Both China and Canada have worked hard on strengthening ties through trade, business and cultural exchanges. These ties become stronger each year. Both imports and exports have quadrupled over the past decade emphasizing the importance of the Asia-Pacific gateway strategy.

We look forward to continuing this mutually beneficial relationship. On behalf of the constituents in Richmond, I would like to say:

[Member spoke in Chinese and provided the following translation:]

Happy Birthday to the People’s Republic of China.

Comments Off