44th Parl. 1st Sess.
September 28, 2022 02:00PM
- Sep/28/22 5:00:53 p.m.
- Watch
All those opposed to the hon. member's moving the motion will please say nay.
It is agreed.
The House has heard the terms of the motion. All those opposed to the motion will please say nay.
37 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Sep/28/22 5:01:19 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, today I want to talk about brain stem glioma. This incurable disease is the leading cause of brain tumour death in children.
Together with my colleagues, the member for Toronto—Danforth, the member for Bruce—Grey—Owen Sound, the member for Sault Ste. Marie and the member for Prince George—Peace River—Northern Rockies, I am presenting a petition signed by more than 13,000 people.
The petitioners are calling on us to designate May 17 of each year as national brain stem glioma awareness day in order to raise awareness about this disease, give hope to Canadian families, ensure that there is enough research funding and save young lives.
On behalf of Isabelle and the little warrior, Florence, let us unite for the young children who suffer from this rare disease.
139 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Sep/28/22 5:02:26 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, I proudly rise today to present petition e-3940, which has been signed by over 800 Canadians who are calling on the Liberal government to cancel the planned fertilizer reduction policy.
Canadians understand limiting fertilizer would decrease food production and, therefore, further increase the cost of food at a time of record inflation. They also know limiting fertilizer would increase the costs to farmers and hinder economic growth. This also comes at a time when Canadians are using food banks at record rates.
Canadians want their government to stand up for Canadian farmers and cancel the fertilizer reduction plan. I wholeheartedly support them.
105 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Sep/28/22 5:03:11 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, it is an honour to rise and present a petition on a burning issue for my constituents, which is the plight of Pacific salmon. It is a species on the brink.
Petitioners call on the Government of Canada to remove the conflict of interest found within the Fisheries Act, which calls on the Department of Fisheries and Oceans as a promoter of salmon aquaculture and also a regulator of salmon aquaculture.
They call for the mandate of DFO to be specifically the promotion of sustainable fisheries and protecting the habitat of salmon. Petitioners call on the government to implement all the recommendations of the commission on salmon of Mr. Justice Cohen and also to ensure the government lives up to the Liberal election promise to get these toxic fish factories out of the water.
136 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Sep/28/22 5:04:20 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, I am presenting a petition today on behalf of a number of my constituents in Bruce—Grey—Owen Sound.
Specifically, they are identifying that, on April 29 of this year, the Liberal government introduced an order to provide further restrictions on licensed firearms owners, specifically via a shadow registry. They point out that the previous gun registry cost taxpayers over a billion dollars, and they point out that this unfairly targets Canadian firearms owners who possess legitimate possession and acquisition licences and restricted possession and acquisition licences. They are already the most vetted and daily-screened Canadians, and it is proven statistically that they are much less likely to commit a crime than non-PAL or RPAL holders.
They, therefore, call upon the government to immediately repeal the order that was passed on April 29, 2022.
140 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Sep/28/22 5:05:26 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, I ask that all questions be allowed to stand at this time.
14 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Sep/28/22 5:05:30 p.m.
- Watch
Is that agreed?
Some hon. members: Agreed.
7 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Sep/28/22 5:05:34 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, I would ask that all notices of motions for the production of papers be allowed to stand at this time.
22 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Sep/28/22 5:05:41 p.m.
- Watch
Is that agreed?
Some hon. members: Agreed.
7 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Mr. Speaker, recently the Chair sought the members' views on whether my bill about public sector integrity, Bill C-290, might require a royal recommendation. The Chair did not specify which part of the bill warranted its intervention, but I surmise that two sections merit analysis.
There is clause 5, which states that the chief executive must provide support to the public servant making a disclosure.
There is also subclause 3(3), which gives contract employees the same protection offered to public servants who disclose wrongdoing in the public sector.
In my view, these provisions do not generate any expenditures that would not be covered by an existing royal recommendation, and that is what I intend to argue today.
I would like to begin by saying a word about Bill C-290. It amends the Public Servants Disclosure Protection Act to make it more effective. That legislation, as members will remember, was passed in the wake of the sponsorship scandal and was intended to provide protection to public servants who disclose wrongdoing in the public sector.
In many cases, only one person within the machinery of government becomes aware of wrongdoing, illegal acts, abuse of power or political interference in decisions that should be up to the non-partisan public service. The purpose of the act is to protect public servants who blow the whistle from reprisal and to create an institution responsible for enforcing the act, the Office of the Public Sector Integrity Commissioner, that public servants can go to for help.
Even though the act was passed more than 15 years ago, it has not produced the expected results. In fact, the federal government has one of the worst whistleblower protection regimes in the world, according to the International Bar Association.
Add up the numerous flaws throughout the act, and it is basically useless. For example, because the definition of wrongdoing is too narrow, many disclosures are not protected by the act. If a public servant makes an unprotected disclosure, their complaint will be rejected, the act will not protect them from reprisal, and their anonymity cannot be guaranteed either. Furthermore, if the whistleblower's complaint is admitted and an investigation is launched, the act does not clearly protect witnesses.
In the case of an internal investigation conducted by a person in a position of authority, this is understandably problematic. It is these flaws that my public sector integrity bill aims to correct.
This brings me to clause 5, which specifies that the chief executive must provide support to a public servant who makes a disclosure. Although the bill does not specify the nature of the support, it is quite clear that it is not financial support. The bill provides for no new financial support, period. The support referenced in clause 5 would involve, rather, things like information, referrals, guidance or advice, all of which are part of the normal duties and functions of executives. In short, we need to ensure that when public servants see wrongdoing, they know their rights, they know where to go, and they are not left to fend for themselves.
This brings me to subclause 3(3) of my bill. It amends the definition of “public servant”, adding “every person retained under contract to perform services for the public sector”. Subclause 3(5) adds that the government cannot terminate a contract as a result of a disclosure. This provision does not generate any expenditure that is not already foreseen, and here is why.
First, the current act already contains provisions about contracts. Under section 42.2, the government may not “withhold any payment that is due and payable in respect of any...contract”. It may not “terminate any contract...by reason only that the other party to the contract or any of that other party's employees has...provided information concerning an alleged wrongdoing”.
Furthermore, a disclosure is not considered a reasonable ground for refusing to enter into a new contract. The problem is that the definition of contract is restrictive. According to the act, contract “does not include an agreement by a public servant, or by a person appointed by the Governor in Council or by a minister of the Crown, to perform the duties to which their employment or appointment relates”.
A construction company that reports wrongdoing at a federal government work site is protected, yet a person hired under contract to provide a service to the government on a temporary basis may not be covered. Because that person meets the definition of a casual worker under the Public Service Employment Act, I gather that they are excluded because they carry out the duties of a public servant but do not enjoy the other protections that public servants have because they are a casual worker.
One example is someone who is offered a three-month contract with the Canada Revenue Agency during income tax season. Because they have no job security, people with precarious status are precisely the ones who need protection the most.
It should be noted that they are not completely unprotected at this time. They are afforded some protection through their contract, which is binding on the Crown. That is how it works right now. Under contract law, which is governed by the Civil Code or by common law, the government cannot unilaterally modify or terminate a contract in an arbitrary manner. This is already the case.
The government's financial commitments are those set out in the contract, whether or not Bill C-290 is passed, but the remedy for contractors who experience retaliation is a civil suit. Bill C‑290 simply changes the administrative process following a complaint.
If Bill C‑290 passes, contractors will be able to file complaints with the commissioner and they will remain anonymous. The complaint will go through the process and the contractor can expect to see an investigation that will result in an end to the wrongdoing. In the event of reprisals in the form of termination of contract, the contractor can seek assistance from the commissioner, who will then reach out to the government, if appropriate, saving contractors from having to sue in court to enforce the provisions of their contracts. This does not, however, change the terms of the contract or the financial obligations thereof.
In short, Bill C‑290 in no way alters any of the government's contractual obligations. These obligations are already binding in civil court and must be met under part III of the Financial Administration Act. Bill C‑290 in no way changes those obligations. It will not generate any expenditure beyond what is already set out in the existing legal framework. It changes neither the amount of the expenditure, nor its terms or any associated conditions. In conclusion, I do not feel that it requires royal recommendation and I am confident that the Chair will come to the same conclusion.
1171 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
I thank the hon. member for Mirabel for his speech on this point of order.
15 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Sep/28/22 5:13:46 p.m.
- Watch
I wish to inform that House that because of the deferred recorded divisions, Government Orders will be extended by 81 minutes.
The hon. member for Edmonton Griesbach.
27 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Mr. Speaker, I am really honoured to rise again in this place to discuss Bill C-29, a bill that intends to establish the national body for reconciliation. It is one that I think has been called for for a long time.
I really want to adjust folks' imagination about what reconciliation should be. When we imagine what reconciliation is in our country, we should imagine a country where indigenous people, first nation, Métis and Inuit truly have an opportunity to be themselves and excel in their own domains. What we are seeing, however, is a government that is insistent on going as slowly as possible in ensuring that these basic dignities and rights are truly recognized.
When we think about how little we have done in the last seven years with this government, it is astonishing to survivors who are at the point in their life where they have now told their story. They thought that after telling the truth of their own experiences with residential schools, the sixties scoop and the current CFS system, things would truly change.
It is unfortunate that this is the reality facing indigenous people today. There are more children in care now than were taken during the residential school period. There are more children continuously living in poverty, without food and in many cases without even shelter and water. These are the conditions of indigenous people in my communities, which are Métis, and in Inuit communities and first nations communities right across the country.
Best estimates put the government at 13 completed calls to action out of the 94. For seven years the government has had an opportunity to address these systemic problems, and Indigenous people are begging the question: Does the government truly care?
Let us back up seven years. The Prime Minister said that the most important relationship to the government would be with indigenous people. What is happening to our relatives is truly a shame. It is an abomination given that these survivors have given so much. The reciprocity that is needed now needs to move mountains, not pebbles, which is currently on display by the Liberal government.
Indigenous people deserve so much more. My hope is that we can reach deep into the understanding of this country to find lessons deep within. I am not the first indigenous member of Parliament to be in this place talking about these things. Louis Riel, at the time when he was elected, was unable to even stand in this place to talk about justice for our people.
Now we have struggled and climbed in this place in order to deliver what we hope is a message to the government that it is not going fast enough and that people are dying, our relatives, day after day while we wait. At the top of the government's agenda is to finally establish the national body for reconciliation, but this is after seven years. It is unacceptable.
The New Democrats will support this bill, but rest assured, indigenous people will not stop until there is truly justice that accounts for the lost resources. From coast to coast to coast, Canadians have to realize and every member of Parliament must realize that they stand on indigenous land, with thousands of years of history. It is a matter of dignity and respect for where we truly are.
When we are a guest in someone's house, we do not go in, steal everything and wreck the place. However, what we are seeing with massive pollution, whether it is in Fort McMurray tailings ponds or the ring of fire, and with indigenous children is that indigenous people are continually pushed to the fringes of what should be a time for true justice.
Survivors have put their stories forward and have shed tears, bringing out the pins and needles stuck deep within their heart to share with Canadians a true fact: that this country has harmed indigenous people even though it was not all that long ago, just a few generations, that we made a great treaty with one another. Where I am from is known as Treaty 6. To be betrayed so greatly and have no potential for justice for residential school survivors, as some of the perpetrators of that violence are still at large, is a real pain that indigenous communities have. They know that the people who hurt them in those schools are still walking the streets.
The Canada I want to be a part of and the Canada I think everyone deserves, particularly indigenous people, must recognize the basic human rights of indigenous people. It must recognize that indigenous people are the stewards and landowners of this place. This is Turtle Island, and I hope all members can find deep within themselves that truth, which is that when they come here to this place, North America, Turtle Island, they should come with dignity and respect for the original landowners. That means having true reciprocity. The things people get from being in this place are the things we must give back. It is a matter of dignity for indigenous people. This is where we are in Canada.
I am pleased to see this bill finally be presented, but I am so disheartened at the rate at which we are moving. This is not fast enough, and I challenge the government to move quicker.
902 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the member's comments. I do not necessarily agree with his synopsis of what the government has or has not done. I will hopefully be able to expand on that.
Is there any specific call to action? If the member were to cite a specific one he believes the Government of Canada needs to be working harder on, could he indicate to the chamber which specific call to action that would be? That would be helpful.
80 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Mr. Speaker, of course we are going to disagree on the rate of this. If his community was suffering this, I would bet the member would be rising every single day, saying the same thing. The reality is that is not the case.
Call to action number 66, for example, calls on the government to develop a plan for indigenous youth. It is something that the government actually committed to and something that relatives in my community have participated in. My relative, Gabrielle Fayant, was the minister's special adviser for call to action number 66. She was just at a Senate hearing to talk about how the government used indigenous youth to produce a report that it has not moved on. It has been almost two years. Indigenous youth cannot wait, and the government needs to do its homework.
140 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Mr. Speaker, I appreciated the speech the member gave. One of the things he talked about was blocked resources. He made some points about Fort McMurray and the energy systems that we have, and also the ring of fire.
Indigenous businesses have tried to promote the businesses that he indicated are causing the problems at this point in time. That is part of the discussion that he should have with everybody who is there, not simply those who are taking a position similar to that of the NDP, which is to try and minimize the activities that we have for our indigenous people.
I was on the aboriginal affairs and northern development committee prior to the truth and reconciliation report. It was handed over to the Liberals, and the Liberals indicated that they were going to do some things.
Can the member talk about his impressions of how quickly those things have been done?
154 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Mr. Speaker, I want to describe the narrative that Conservatives often use when it comes to indigenous people. We do not have to look too far to find it.
When it comes to resource projects, it seems as though the Conservatives are right there when a company has an interest in a development. If there is a proposal that puts an indigenous group in favour of that project, they are there. However, when an indigenous community wants to protect its water, the Conservatives are nowhere to be seen.
The member knows very well that there are people whose lives depend on that clean water and whose livelihood depends on that culture, from fishing to hunting to so many more traditional activities. It is unfair that the member would assume that because indigenous people have a different perspective, some of them do not care about their land or environment. It is important that when we talk about resource projects, we talk about the people who have been stewarding that land for thousands of years and what is at risk.
When it comes time to understand that these impacts will be on children and future generations, indigenous people know what is important. I come from a community that knows that as well. My community has been ravaged by the oil sector. There are still, to date, a huge amount, billions of dollars' worth, of outstanding, uncleaned orphan wells. That is in Alberta. What is happening right now is those indigenous communities are being asked to just leave them or clean them up themselves, while the Conservatives will not even mention the fact that it is the companies that they purport to support that are drilling these sites and polluting our environment without a penny going to reclamation.
I would be glad to talk about this subject all day.
306 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Sep/28/22 5:24:54 p.m.
- Watch
I will now make my daily request to hon. members, which is that when they ask questions, they should keep them short. They should also keep the answers short, so that everyone can participate. I am seeing three people standing and wanting to ask questions, but we do not have any time left.
Resuming debate, the hon. member for West Vancouver—Sunshine Coast—Sea to Sky Country.
69 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Mr. Speaker, before I begin, I would like to acknowledge that Canada's Parliament is located on the ancestral and unceded territory of the Algonquin Anishinabe people.
I also want to mention that I will be sharing my time with the member for Winnipeg North.
As my hon. colleague has just mentioned, Canadians are committed to taking the necessary steps to ensure that we make progress toward true and respectful reconciliation. As Canada increasingly comes to grips with the unspeakable harms committed at residential schools, we are working with communities across the country on the heart-wrenching but necessary work to locate and commemorate missing children.
Many indigenous residents and their families in my riding, such as the Líl̓wat, were forced to attended the Kamloops Indian Residential School, where the tragedy of unmarked graves first came to light nationally. The Shíshálh are also currently researching and searching for missing children at the site of the former day school, with ground-penetrating radar.
As they are forced to relive the trauma of residential schools, we know it is not just the survivors and descendants who were impacted. It has led to terrible and sometimes permanent impacts on indigenous cultures and languages throughout the country.
We are supporting education and awareness initiatives through the National Centre for Truth and Reconciliation and the second annual National Day for Truth and Reconciliation, taking place this Friday, September 30. I invite all members of the House, and indeed all Canadians, to take the time this Friday to learn and understand the painful history and ongoing trauma that residential schools have inflicted upon indigenous peoples.
Walking the path of reconciliation will require consistent action and an earnest desire to forge a new relationship based on mutual respect, trust and nation-to-nation recognition, to which indigenous peoples are entitled. This work is vital, complex and long-term, and it will have to take place under our government and any governments that follow. For that reason, it is crucial that we have systems to measure the progress we are making as a country as we work toward reconciliation, and that we hold the government accountable to its obligations towards indigenous peoples.
In this regard, we are guided by the Truth and Reconciliation Commission's calls to action. In 2015, the Truth and Reconciliation Commission, which was chaired by the Hon. Murray Sinclair, investigated the history and legacy of residential schools and released its final report.
It was the culmination of six years of hearings and testimonies from more than 6,000 residential school survivors and their loved ones. The report included 94 calls to action to redress the legacy of residential schools and achieve true reconciliation based on the experience and recommendations of survivors.
The Government of Canada is committed to implementing each and every one of these calls to action. One of the many key steps forward, made just last year, was the passing into law of legislation to implement the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples into Canadian Law.
We know progress has been made, but everyone in this place would agree that there is a lot of work to do.
That is why I stand before the House today, to ask that we pass Bill C-29 without delay so that Canada can be held accountable for our progress and our promises on reconciliation.
To ensure accountability, Bill C-29 will create a national council for reconciliation, with a mandate to monitor Canada's progress toward reconciliation and to develop a multi-year national action plan to advance reconciliation. It will conduct research into promising new practices in Canada and around the world that will advance our efforts toward reconciliation, and it will have the power to make recommendations to the government on advancing reconciliation in all aspects of Canadian society.
It will also work to educate the public about indigenous people's realities and histories and to advocate for reconciliation across the country. These measures are a vital part of keeping the government accountable on its obligations toward indigenous people and ensuring that all governments in Canada are conscious of their duty to walk the path of reconciliation.
Passing Bill C-29 and establishing a national council for reconciliation will help us make significant strides toward implementing all of the calls to action and making concrete progress on reconciliation across the country.
In fact, establishing the council was something that the commission specifically called for in calls to action 53 to 56. Advancing Bill C-29 will ensure that we are well on our way to implementing these four calls to action.
As previously mentioned, the bill will enable the creation of the national council for reconciliation, which will immediately fulfill call to action 53.
Budget 2019 already allocated funding, totalling $126.5 million, to support the establishment of the national council for reconciliation, including $1.5 million for its first year of operations and a $125-million endowment for its ongoing operating capital. If established, this funding can be immediately transferred to the council, meeting the first stage of funding obligations under call to action 54.
If the council is created, Bill C-29 will also lay the foundation to address calls to action 55 and 56. Call to action 55 asked that Canada provide key information to the council to support it in its work. Bill C-29 would ensure there are open lines of communication between the council and Canada's governments and institutions, so that information can flow easily and efficiently. This would be established through an information-sharing protocol between the responsible minister and the council. This kind of transparency is vital to rebuilding trust and strengthening our relationships with indigenous peoples and all Canadians.
Finally, call to action 56 states that the government must respond to the council's annual reports. Bill C-29 would also commit the federal government to publishing an annual report on the state of indigenous peoples. This report would outline the Government of Canada's plans to advance reconciliation, year by year, so that all Canadians can clearly see how the government is taking action.
As we look forward to the day when the council is established, these last two critical commitments, about information sharing and reporting back, would ensure that the Government of Canada remains accountable to the council and in turn accountable to Canadians.
Establishing the national council for reconciliation would do more than fulfill the four calls to action I just mentioned. A key part of the council's mandate would be to evaluate and report on the implementation of all the calls to action. This is a vital milestone on our path toward reconciliation.
We often talk about which calls to action we have fulfilled or which ones are on their way, and there is often much debate on how quickly we are advancing. Federal, provincial, municipal and indigenous governments, along with other institutions and parts of society, have not always worked together in a harmonized way. This has made it difficult to get an accurate picture of our progress on reconciliation as a whole across the country. That is what the national council for reconciliation would help us accomplish. The council would take stock of our progress as a nation and provide us with advice and direction on how to accelerate the implementation of all calls to action, not just the 76 that are under federal or shared responsibility.
There is a dire need to make progress on reconciliation, not only on the calls to action, but on who we are as a country. Seeing the big picture is critical to achieving tangible progress toward greater reconciliation in this country, and that is exactly what Bill C-29 would do. It would allow us to establish, support and maintain a national council for reconciliation, fulfilling calls to action 53 to 56. Beyond this, we would be setting the foundation to evaluate and report on the implementation of all the TRC's calls to action.
While I think this is a vital step, I want to highlight that I believe there is room for improvement in this bill. We must ensure that the council's board of directors is more representative of the diversity of the 634 indigenous communities right across the country. Whether they be historical or modern treaty nations, have no treaty, are living on or off reserve or are self-governing, it is vital that their voices be a part of the process and serve to guide us forward toward reconciliation, but in order to do that we must pass this bill now, so that it can be studied, debated and improved at committee.
Passing this bill would demonstrate to Canadians that we are serious about implementing the calls to action and being accountable for our actions and commitments. Just as we showed by passing the net-zero emissions accountability act that we are serious about meeting our emissions reductions targets, we must pass this bill to show we are serious about keeping our promises to indigenous peoples and we are serious about reconciliation.
With that, ?ul nu msh chalap.
1536 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Madam Speaker, I agree with much of what my colleague from the Liberal Party had to say, and I appreciate his sentiment.
I have a question around the timing of this. Of course, the government has said that no relationship is more important to it than its relationship with indigenous peoples. It has said a lot of the right words around reconciliation, but the final report of the interim board for the national council for reconciliation was completed in June 2018. I wonder if the member can provide any insight as to why it took the government so long to bring this forward and why we could not have had this debate many years before.
115 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
