44th Parl. 1st Sess.
October 25, 2022 10:00AM
- Oct/25/22 6:04:03 p.m.
- Watch
- Re: Bill C-9
Madam Speaker, an agreement could not be reached under the provisions of Standing Orders 78(1) or 78(2) with respect to the second reading stage of Bill C‑9, an act to amend the Judges Act.
Under the provisions of Standing Order 78(3), I give notice that a minister of the Crown will propose at the next sitting a motion to allot a specific number of days or hours for the consideration and disposal of proceedings at the said stage.
83 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Madam Speaker, I am glad that we are here to discuss Bill C‑283 today. This bill reminds me of Bill C‑216, which was introduced by our colleague from Courtenay—Alberni not so long ago. We supported that bill, but unfortunately it was not supported by the majority of the House. I hope this bill will go a little further this time around.
Bill C‑283 makes certain amendments to the Criminal Code, including, for example, a provision that would allow a federal inmate to be sent to an addiction treatment facility if the court finds the inmate eligible.
The bill also amends the Corrections and Conditional Release Act to allow a penitentiary to be designated as an addiction treatment facility. When a court recommends that a person serve his or her sentence there, Correctional Service Canada will be required to ensure that the inmate is placed there as soon as possible.
In Quebec, we have long decided to favour rehabilitation. However, in 2014, 50% of prisoners in federal penitentiaries had a drug addiction problem. According to experts, drug addiction is what drives most of those people into committing a crime, which brings them back to prison, where drugs are very easy to get, despite what people might think.
In 2021, Frédérick Lebeau, president of the Union of Canadian Correctional Officers for the Quebec region, said, “There's a major issue, a problem of delivery [of drugs and other prohibited items] inside the penitentiaries. It's too easy. It's got to get harder.”
With the advent of drones, it will be easier than ever to deliver drugs into prisons. By 2020, officers at Donnacona's 451-inmate maximum-security penitentiary had detected 60 drones, but they estimated that was just the tip of the iceberg.
penitentiaries will have to implement new drone detection technology in November, but the union is under no illusions. Drugs will continue to come into prisons. In short, incarceration does not solve drug abuse problems, quite the opposite.
We must also take into consideration that recidivism rates among drug addicts is very high. When they get out of prison, many immediately try to obtain drugs and often turn to crime to finance their purchases.
Federal penitentiaries do a poor job of rehabilitating inmates, so this bill could be the step in the right direction that we have been waiting for.
According to a study by the Center for Interuniversity Research and Analysis of Organizations published in 2019, Quebec is an example to the world when it comes to rehabilitating inmates. According to the study, Quebec's reintegration programs for inmates in Quebec-run prisons reduce the risk of recidivism and perform significantly better than elsewhere in the world. These reintegration programs, which are not only aimed at drug addicts, reduce the recidivism rate from 50% to 10% among participating prisoners.
Quebec's drug treatment courts have existed since 2012 and have been so successful that they served as a model for a pilot project to address recidivism among drug addicts in France. By comparison, federal penitentiaries are failing miserably at the rehabilitation of inmates. According to the 2020 annual report of the Correctional Investigator of Canada, inmates in federal institutions do not receive useful training or work experience during their incarceration and do not have access to necessary care. In short, they are very poorly equipped to reintegrate into civil society.
Another fact to note is that indigenous people are overrepresented in federal penitentiaries. They represent less than 5% of Canada's population, but 32% of the prison population.
Worse still, according to the Office of the Correctional Investigator of Canada, women represent 50% of this prison population. Addiction issues and the absence of effective programs to treat them probably go a long way to explaining why indigenous peoples are overrepresented in our prisons.
In committee, during the study of the various bills that were passed previously, including on the issue of mandatory minimums, we saw that the need to curb the overrepresentation of indigenous peoples among inmates is a major concern for the government.
We did not agree that abolishing mandatory minimums would help reduce the percentage of indigenous people in prison populations. In my view, there is no logical corollary. The existence of mandatory minimums does not lead to more indigenous inmates.
The problem lies elsewhere, and this may be our chance to correct it. Bill C-283 would allow for an addict to be placed in custody and receive follow-up care in a place that specializes in treating addictions, which could reduce the risk of recidivism for the inmate and improve their chances of successfully reintegrating society.
Under this legislation, the onus would be on inmates to ask the court to put them in an addiction treatment facility. Inmates would thereby acknowledge their addiction, which we all agree is the first step toward healing. The court would then determine whether the inmates could serve part or all of their sentence in such a facility. The Bloc Québécois sees only benefits to this.
The Bloc will therefore vote in favour of Bill C‑283, just as we did last spring for Bill C‑216, which was introduced by the member for Courtenay—Alberni.
The bill, as it is worded, is not perfect, of course, so it needs amending. I am sure that the members of the committee tasked with studying it will be very eager to improve it.
927 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Madam Speaker, I want to thank my colleague who tabled this bill for bringing it forward and for recognizing that we must do more to support people dealing with substance use disorders.
As we know, Canada is experiencing multiple crises: a mental health crisis, a toxic drug crisis, a housing crisis and a worsening affordability crisis. There are links between these crises, and they are impacting the quality of life for Canadians in communities across the country. It is incumbent upon us, as parliamentarians, to present and debate solutions so we can move forward in the best interests of Canadians.
In developing possible solutions, I believe it is critical to listen to both experts and those with lived or living experience. Last year, I was honoured to be named the NDP critic for mental health and harm reduction. I promptly tabled Bill C-216, the health-based approach to substance use act. This bill was aligned with the recommendations of the expert task force on substance use that was commissioned by Health Canada to make recommendations on federal drug policy.
Earlier this year, as I travelled across the country to speak to Canadians about Bill C-216, I had the opportunity to meet with many individuals directly affected by the toxic drug crisis, either personally, through someone they love, or because they were working on the front lines. I consistently heard that we need more supports for people struggling with mental illness, trauma, problematic substance use and housing precarity.
I also heard that there is no silver bullet. We know these are complex issues that require multi-faceted solutions, such as investing in the social determinants of health like housing and income security, increasing the focus on prevention and early prevention, and making a full range of mental health and substance use supports available on demand.
While Canada is facing an intersecting crisis, we are not making adequate investments into urgently needed solutions. Relative to the disease burden caused by mental illness, and compared to some of our G7 peers, Canada is underspending on mental health. France spends 15% of its health care budget on mental health, whereas the U.K. spends 13%. By comparison, mental health spending makes up between 5% to 7% of health care budgets in Canada, depending on the province or territory, so underinvestment in prevention and evidence-based care has come at a tragic cost to our communities.
Canada has now lost more 30,000 lives since 2016 because of drug poisonings, in addition to more than 44,000 hospitalizations. This public health emergency has been escalating for seven years, yet the government has only committed $800 million to date for its substance use and addictions program. Meanwhile, the expert task force on substance use found that current ineffective policies are costing us billions every year in health care, policing and criminal justice expenses.
I appreciate the bill's intent. It seems to provide a route of access to treatment for those with substance use disorders and reduces the impacts of problematic substance use on individuals and their communities. However, I have some concerns about some of the assumptions that may have been made in formulating the bill, and I cited some of them earlier, as well as how it may play out in practice if passed.
In doing research and consultation on this bill, a theme that has come up consistently is that prisons are currently places of punishment and not care. The United Nations Nelson Mandela rules provide that the quality of health care provided to incarcerated persons must be equivalent to that available to the general population. However, concerns have long been raised about the quality of care in Canadian prisons and inherent conflicts that arise when correctional authorities are responsible for delivering health care.
Catherine Latimer, the executive director of the John Howard Society of Canada, has explained this conflict as follows, “Whenever you have correctional authorities delivering health care, there’s going to be irreconcilable conflict between the institution and the health-care needs of the individual”. She continues, “Security issues will always trump the health needs of the individuals.”
Emilie Coyle, the executive director of the Canadian Association of the Elizabeth Fry Societies, echoed that perspective in conversation in my office and commented that, if we try to insert care into prisons, people will continue to be harmed by our overly punitive prison systems.
Today, my office spoke with an individual with lived experience of opioid use disorder and criminal justice involvement. This individual is now doing advocacy work in recovery and shared the perspective, “Prisons do not breed success.” Indeed, the shortcomings of mental health care in federal penitentiaries has been well documented, such as reports by the correctional investigator and the final report of the National Inquiry into Missing and Murdered Indigenous Women and Girls.
Before establishing a regime of designated addictions treatment facilities in penitentiaries that will necessarily require significant investments, it is important to pause and ask: Where can someone get the best care? Where will they receive care that is evidence-based, trauma informed and culturally appropriate? Where are they most likely to achieve their treatment or recovery goals?
The answer we have heard consistently from those working with incarcerated individuals or with lived experience is that people are better served by accessing mental health and substance use care in their communities. Unfortunately, across Canada, there are barriers to accessing community-based mental health and substance use services, such as stigma, out-of-pocket costs, lengthy wait-lists, admission criteria and lack of detox facilities. Last year, the Expert Task Force on Substance Use recommended that the government make significant new investments to provide supports to people who use drugs, but that call has not been heeded, and the level of funding committed to date remains inadequate to meet the needs in communities across the country.
I welcome the opportunity to work with the member on initiatives that will remove barriers to substance use treatment and recovery services so that all Canadians can get the support they need in their communities. No one should have to go to jail to get help. That is just a fact.
I am also concerned that the bill may prevent people who want help from accessing it. In its current form, the bill proposes to exclude individuals convicted of certain offences, including drug trafficking offences, from its scope. This seems to ignore the fact that some individuals with substance use disorders become involved in subsistence trafficking. Exclusions in the bill could create barriers to accessing treatment in federal prisons.
Indeed, the individual with lived experience I spoke of earlier would not have benefited from the bill, having been convicted of trafficking. He was, fortunately, able to access treatment prior to sentencing and while in recovery, he has remained gainfully employed and involved in community service. After reviewing the bill, he asked how many people serving federal sentences might benefit from the bill, given the excluded offences. It is a good question, and a question that needs to be answered.
While I appreciate the bill's intent to create pathways to treatment, I think we must be careful to avoid introducing new barriers. We must also think about where we can make criminal justice reforms and investments in substance use services that will increase the likelihood of successful outcomes.
I really want to thank the member for prompting this debate. I look forward to further dialogue with my colleague and other colleagues in the House. We have to work together. This is a parallel crisis right now, which we have been dealing with throughout COVID, and the government has not paid enough attention to it. It has not acted with a sense of urgency. People's lives are at stake. This is impacting our communities, our health care system, penitentiaries, policing and the judicial system. Most of all, it is impacting people's lives and those of their families.
Again, I look forward to working with all members in the House to try to provide solutions so that we can tackle this crisis. It does require a sense of urgency and immediacy.
1370 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Madam Speaker, I thank my colleague from Kelowna—Lake Country for her work on this important legislation.
At its core, Bill C-283 is about ensuring those with addictions are provided the help they need. It is also about providing their loved ones with peace of mind. Those addicted to drugs are someone's mother, father, sister, brother, son, daughter or friend.
I will be reading this speech not only as a parliamentarian but also as a dad. Heather and I are proud parents to five adult children. There is nothing we would not do to ensure their well-being, peace of mind and security. I am so proud of each of them.
My family has struggled with opioid addiction for 20 years. We empathize with all Canadian families who have suffered at the hands of addiction. Heather and I are not alone. Canadian families are not alone. Those listening right now who are struggling with addiction are not alone. In fact, I do not believe there is a single individual in this chamber who has not been touched, in some way, by cocaine, crystal meth, heroin, fentanyl or other opioids.
It has been said that having a child is like having one's heart walk around outside one's body. There are mothers and fathers across this country who are startled awake in the middle of the night by the sound of a jacket zipper, a floor creaking or a door opening. They are all sounds familiar to parents of a son or daughter who is leaving to use drugs.
These moments give way to sleepless nights wondering if that child will make it home safely. These fears last a lifetime. My heart goes out to those who suffer from addictions and their families who bear the weight of the stress and worry that comes with caring for loved ones suffering from addiction. The road to recovery, of which I have both professional and personal experience, is a very difficult and long commitment.
Before I go any further, I would like to make an important distinction for all colleagues in the House.
Those who suffer from drug addiction deserve our compassion and care. Those who repeatedly break the law or have no regard for the safety of those around them deserve to be arrested and dealt with through our court system. Those found guilty of crimes should go to prison where they can seek out and be provided the help they need. This is precisely where our system is not working, and it is where the bill can make an enormous difference in the lives of Canadians.
Sending an addicted individual to prison without providing them with dedicated access to the programs and services they need to recover is futile. Addressing the core cause of their crime, addiction, in meaningful ways is what will put an end to recidivism and allow many Canadian families to heal. Addressing addiction when an individual is convicted of a crime or when the addiction is the cause is precisely where this legislation can make an extraordinary difference.
Canada's approach to addressing drug use, addiction and associated crime has not been successful, and my constituents are concerned the government is out of touch with what is happening on the ground in communities across Canada. Canadians are concerned about legislative decisions being made on matters pertaining to prostitution, guns and drug-related crime. My colleagues on the justice committee know this all too well.
We do not need to look very far in my riding of Kootenay—Columbia to see this in real time. The city of Cranbrook was once a quiet, mountain town. Today, it is the home of a tent city, with an exploding homeless population and rising crime. Criminals are wreaking havoc on other homeless individuals, our youth, families and businesses. Stories of paying it forward have been replaced in the news by stories of intimidation, theft, vandalism, physical assaults and shootings. Young people are afraid to go to work for fear of physical harm and children are no longer free to explore their sense of adventure in certain areas of the city.
This is a problem born out of the current provincial and federal policies, and there is not a single city council in Canada that would be able to solve this problem. Municipal leaders across British Columbia, such as Vancouver, have called on the government to act on addictions and the associated revolving door of crime caused by convicted criminals being released without action, or worse, being released without addressing their addiction during sentencing.
B.C.'s Urban Mayors' Caucus identified mental health and substance treatment as a priority for the federal government to address. Earlier this year, the B.C. attorney general acknowledged there was an increase in the number of no-charge decisions from his office and blamed the federal government for his actions. He referred to Bill C-75, which talks about using the principle of restraint for police and courts to ensure that release at the earliest opportunity is favoured over detention. What this equates to on the ground is prioritization of the offender over the victim.
While there are some who are uncomfortable with labelling prolific offenders, let me help clarify. Individuals who are convicted of 50, 75 or 100 or more offences have a prolific record, and they have been through the revolving door of our catch and release justice system too many times. This has to stop.
Our laws are meant to protect law-abiding citizens as well as those who protect and serve. To send an offender back on the streets to cause harm or break the law for the 78th time is not a solution that is working and, to be frank, it is a slap in the face to victims. However, if the offender, instead of being released to cause further harm or sent to prison to become more hardened, was sent to a designated treatment facility, we would have an opportunity to address the root of the crime.
Canadians are asking for help. We are here today offering real solutions to real problems that will make a difference in helping addicted individuals deal with real pain. Mental health and addiction may be the single largest challenge of our time, and I know all members of this House want to do more for those struggling with these issues.
Bill C-283 is an opportunity to do just that. The bill proposes a different program for addiction treatment while incarcerated, and this means the necessity for rehabilitation while serving a sentence. At the core, this is about treating addiction in an effort to stem the crime, or in other words, addressing the root cause of the issue. The approach is a positive solution for rehabilitation, resulting in individuals being able to make a positive contribution within our communities.
The bill would amend the Criminal Code of Canada to support two-stream sentencing, both of which would have the same sentence time. However, the individual would be called upon, being provided a choice by a judge, to choose between the current system or a designated treatment facility. The bill would not provide criminals with a pass on prison, but rather bridges correction and treatment for those who have entered the system because of drug addiction and are choosing to participate in recovery.
Addiction numbers in B.C. and across the country are growing, with many individuals entering the correctional system who may be better served with the opportunity to address the cause of their criminal activity. The purpose of an addiction treatment facility is to provide the individual access to the program for treatment in relation to the substance use, as well as to other related services that will address specific needs. Individuals may be sentenced to serve in a designated facility if there is evidence establishing a pattern of repetitive behaviour by the individual that indicates problematic substance abuse.
This brings us to the tragic and preventable loss of Constable Shaelyn Yang, who was sadly murdered while courageously helping those who suffer from mental health and addiction. Mayors from cities across B.C., including Burnaby, have complained publicly about the catch and release justice system.
Last week, the leader of the official opposition asked what policy changes the Prime Minister would be willing to make to put this crime wave to an end. I suggest to all members this bill is an important part of that suite of tools needed to address addictions. We cannot turn back time and prevent the senseless loss of Constable Shaelyn Yang, but we can act to prevent future murders. I invite all colleagues to join me in supporting this legislation.
The bill would validate and begin to repair the legitimate ongoing concerns of families, communities and indigenous communities. Further, it would serve as an important tool to address the general mental health and welfare of those who participate, with an aim to help make a better future for young Canadians struggling with addictions. Those struggling with addiction deserve treatment and recovery.
Successful crime prevention starts with our youth and must continue throughout their lives. Education programs can be successful if delivered at the right times.
As we consider Bill C-283, I would ask each of us to look through the eyes of Constable Shaelyn Yang and do right by the victims, the victims of addictions, the victims of crime and the victims, the family, of those who have lost a loved one. Finally, may we see this through the lens of a mother, father, sister, brother and friend who are desperate for their loved ones to get help before it is too late.
1622 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Madam Speaker, it is really quite nice to be able to stand and talk about an important issue. I am reflecting as I am listening to many of the comments, and kind of wish that maybe we could have had a little more time to have the debate, as there seems to be a very high level of interest in an issue that has had an impact in every region of our country.
What I want to do, in recognizing how important our judicial system is and the way in which incarceration works, is to try to bring a slightly different perspective. For many years I served as chair of the Keewatin youth justice committee. I had the opportunity to work with the community and with young people dealing with a wide spectrum of issues. I bring that, along with the fact that I was the justice critic for a short period of time in the province of Manitoba.
I would suggest that in dealing with the magnitude and severity of the issue, we need to look at it in a very holistic fashion, to recognize that there is provincial jurisdiction, federal jurisdiction and even municipal jurisdiction, not to mention the many different stakeholders out there, all of which want to be able to contribute to making life in our communities better and safer. A part of that is recognizing that there are things that take place in society that we should all be concerned about, and that we all have a role to play. The private member's bill provides us the opportunity to share some of that.
I want to pick up on a couple of things. Over the last number of years, we have seen many different initiatives brought forward by the government, whether it is national legislation or budgetary measures, that are actually having an impact. I do not say that lightly. I often get grants across my desk that have been approved that are going to support non-profit organizations. I see legislation dealing with issues such as minimum sentencing, trying to deal with the high percentage of indigenous and Black members of our communities. These are the types of issues that make a difference.
I look at the individual. I have had an opportunity to walk with the Bear Clan in the north end of Winnipeg. I know others in this House have also walked with the Bear Clan in the north end of Winnipeg. I always find it interesting when we really look into who the people are who make up the Bear Clan. There are some absolutely incredible volunteers. There are people who come from the community itself, from in and around Winnipeg and from many different professions.
The ones who interested me the most on the walk I took in particular were some of the drug addicts, who were having a difficult time. It made me reflect on a program I had taken many years ago on the impact of crack. It was truly amazing what an addiction could do, particularly to a young person. Crack does not discriminate. There was this relatively young lady who, as a result of being fed into an addiction, ultimately compromised her opportunities in life and lost a lot.
In many situations like that, what we will find is that there are people breaking the law to deal with the addiction they have. I would like to believe that it is somewhat controllable, but just the sheer size and magnitude of the problem dictates that no one level of government or community stakeholder will be able to deal with the severity of the problem. It is just too big.
If members want to get a better sense of its magnitude, I invite them to take a walk with the Bear Clan. Members will get a better sense of the magnitude if they visit some of the youth to sit down and have that conversation about the barriers in place. It is hard to talk to someone who thinks there is no reason to have hope because of the environment they are growing up in, where addictions and crime are prevalent far too often. As well, there is an impact on their community.
When we talk about treatment, the very best we can do is to develop programs that will prevent individuals from going into our jails. Next to that, we must ensure that programs are developed and supported the best way we can, which will prevent people from returning to be incarcerated. There are many things we could actually do.
I am a big fan of community-based efforts where the community itself gets directly involved. That is important for us to continue to look at. Whenever we talk about treatment programs, in my opinion, we need to put a lens of community involvement in what and how they can be engaged, along with the many stakeholders.
822 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
The hon. member's time is up.
The time provided for the consideration of Private Members' Business has now expired and the order is dropped to the bottom of the order of precedence on the Order Paper.
37 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Oct/25/22 6:40:08 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, the current Liberal government is desperate to justify their dishonest and unjustified use of the Emergencies Act. We have seen a series of misleading statements and outright fabrications about these protests, and it is part of the pattern of dishonest behaviour we have seen by the Minister of Public Safety and by the Minister of Emergency Preparedness.
The Emergencies Act is an extreme piece of legislation that, when invoked, allows the suspension of normal protections for civil liberties. The Emergencies Act is therefore for genuine public emergencies and not for the government to invoke arbitrarily. Even when laws are being broken, the government should not use the Emergencies Act unless it has no other alternative.
Conservatives have always encouraged protesters to make their voices heard through lawful means, but the fact is that the border blockades were all cleared by law enforcement without and prior to the invocation of the Emergencies Act. The Liberal government knew all this. It knew that law enforcement agencies had not yet exhausted their options, yet it suspended civil liberties and proceeded to threaten the bank accounts and financial security of Canadians, even Canadians who were far away from the national capital.
Incredibly, the Emergencies Act has never been used before in Canadian history, despite the various events that have taken place since it was created. Its predecessor, the War Measures Act, was only used during the First World War, the Second World War and the FLQ crisis. It has not been used in response to a myriad of other protests and challenges, including a couple of years ago when our national rail network was shut down by protesters.
There is a big difference between enforcing the law and falsely declaring a national emergency to give oneself the tools to punish those one disagrees with. Many people who did not agree with the protest that took place have still spoken out against the government's arbitrary use of the Emergencies Act to suspend civil liberties and the negative precedent that this sets.
As part of the Liberals' efforts to justify this, in April of this year the Minister of Public Safety claimed, before a committee, that law enforcement had asked for the Emergencies Act. He said the advice received was to invoke the Emergencies Act. That is what the Minister of Public Safety said. However, later, the RCMP commissioner and Ottawa's police chief both confirmed that they actually did not ask for the Emergencies Act. The deputy minister later sought to offer some clarification and, maybe making the situation more fuzzy, said that the minister had been misunderstood. However, it was clear then and it is clear now that the Minister of Public Safety misled the House and he should resign. He should have resigned, but he is still here.
There are many other claims advanced by members of the government. For instance, different members of the House claimed repeatedly that protesters who were here as part of events in January had tried to burn down a building. It was subsequently clarified that the attempted arson had nothing whatsoever to do with that protest, yet that was a claim that was repeated over and over again. We saw claims that these protests were Russian funded, that they were government funded and that there were guns at the protest, all of which has been shown to be totally false.
We have a Minister of Public Safety who has misled the House and now, to update things to where we are today, we have information about the Minister of Emergency Preparedness misleading the House about interfering in an investigation and contradicting the RCMP commissioner.
The fact is that Canadians cannot trust the current government when the two ministers responsible for emergency preparedness and public safety have clearly shown a lack of regard for the truth. These ministers should resign. When will they resign?
649 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Oct/25/22 6:44:01 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, I am pleased to speak in response to the hon. member for Sherwood Park—Fort Saskatchewan on the Government of Canada's engagement with law enforcement and other partners leading up to the use of the Emergencies Act. While the hon. member may wish to stand on the side of the “freedom convoy”, we will stand with Canadians and with law enforcement, ensuring that the safety of Canadians is always our number one priority.
In January and February we saw illegal blockades at the borders and vital trade corridors that impacted our communities' safety, our economy and Canadians' jobs and livelihoods. The illegal protests shut down streets and businesses across Canada.
We recognized that these unprecedented simultaneous illegal blockades constituted a public order emergency, and we have carefully documented this. We also recognized that a safe, peaceful outcome would require the full engagement of provinces, territories and law enforcement. From the beginning, we brought these partners to the table to share situational intelligence, explore possible strategies to achieve a quick and peaceful resolution to the blockades, and discuss the resources needed.
To meet the requirements of the Emergencies Act, a public report describing the consultations we undertook before invoking the act has been tabled in both houses of Parliament. I would encourage all Canadians to read these two public reports. They illuminate the crisis facing Canada and the many discussions we had with partners to find a peaceful path forward. Through these discussions with law enforcement and others, it became clear that the police needed more tools to enforce the law and protect Canadians.
Given the size, number and entrenched nature of the blockades, it became clear that emergency measures were needed. Law enforcement needed the additional tools provided by the Emergencies Act. These tools allowed police to take quick, time-limited action and remove the blockade threat decisively.
Testifying before the House of Commons Standing Committee on Public Safety and National Security on March 24, 2022, the former interim chief of the Ottawa Police Service, Steve Bell, confirmed, “From a policing perspective, the legislation provided the OPS with the ability to prevent people from participating in this unlawful protest”. He referred to the invocation of the act as “a critical piece” of these efforts.
The Emergencies Act was a measure of last resort, but it was a necessary one that was crucial in ending the illegal blockades. The act allowed the exceptional and temporary measures to prohibit public assembly leading to a breach of the peace. This was immensely helpful in dispersing the crowds blockading border crossings and city centres. The act also clearly designated protected areas around our critical infrastructure, like border crossings and key government buildings. Once the Emergencies Act was in force, engagement with law enforcement and our partners continued. We were determined that these tools should only be in place as long as absolutely necessary.
Testifying before the Special Joint Committee on the Declaration of Emergency on May 10, 2022, the commissioner of the RCMP, Brenda Lucki, said, “the measures enacted under the Emergencies Act provided all police officers across the country—not just the RCMP—with the ability to deal with blockades and unlawful public assemblies.” She testified it was her belief that the act “provided [law enforcement agencies] with the tools to resolve the crisis swiftly and peacefully”. Once it was clear the situation was no longer an emergency, we revoked the Emergencies Act.
This situation came to a peaceful conclusion because of our engagement with law enforcement, as well as our close collaboration with provinces, territories and municipalities.
611 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Oct/25/22 6:48:04 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, the implication of the parliamentary secretary's remarks is that any means are justified and we are either on the side of the protesters or on the side of using the Emergencies Act. Many Canadians might not have agreed with things that were done in the protest but also do not agree with the suspension of civil liberties.
In particular, the parliamentary secretary danced around the core question here. The Minister of Public Safety claimed that the advice he received from law enforcement was to invoke the Emergencies Act. That was explicitly contradicted by every law enforcement agency and, in effect, by the deputy minister. That contradiction is not being acknowledged. That dishonest statement is not being acknowledged.
Can the parliamentary secretary answer the basic question? Does she still believe law enforcement asked for the Emergencies Act?
139 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Oct/25/22 6:48:59 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, let us be clear. To the assertion the hon. member made that there was an infringement of civil liberties under the Emergencies Act, in fact, the act is quite clear that there was no infringement on civil liberties whatsoever, and that the Charter of Rights and Freedoms continues to apply even during the Emergencies Act. I do wish the hon. member would not imply such.
I will reiterate what I said during my remarks. Invoking the Emergencies Act was a measure of last resort, and it was supported by law enforcement. It gave them the additional tools they needed to end the illegal blockades peacefully.
107 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Oct/25/22 6:49:47 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, as the member of Parliament for Renfrew—Nipissing—Pembroke, I begin my comments by recognizing those constituents struggling with grocery bills, fuel bills and tax bills from an out-of-touch federal government that has declared war on the average Canadian.
When I asked my question on taxation, Canadians took note it was the natural resources minister responding, not the Minister of Finance. He did so by confirming raising taxes to make life unaffordable was Liberal carbon tax policy. We can now refer to the natural resources minister as the acting minister of finance. This confirms what Conservatives have been saying all along: the carbon policy is a tax policy. Carbon taxes are no substitute for environmental policy.
This also raises the question: Is the hidden agenda behind the carbon taxes to abolish capitalism? Capitalism is undeniably the most successful form of wealth creation and distribution that has ever been devised. The key to that system's huge success is individual and corporate freedom with government getting out of the way to unleash human potential. Capitalism has done more to raise the standard of living, lifting more people out of poverty than all socialist government handouts combined.
As a free market Conservative, I know my Conservative Party believes in freedom and free enterprise. We need an environmental policy that focuses on science-based and human ingenuity solutions to pollution. The Liberals are forcing seniors and other Canadians on fixed incomes to have to choose between heating and eating. Emerging economies will not sacrifice poverty eradication and economic development to follow Canada's crushing carbon tax approach that brings so much pain for so little results.
In Canada today, the Liberals' carbon tax policy designed to make fossil fuels expensive is now doing exactly what it was intended to do: making everything more expensive. This means a very bleak winter is ahead. We should be taking the pathway of innovation. As fossil fuel prices climb, the Prime Minister and his acting finance minister believe people will shift painlessly to renewable energy sources. The Liberal Party ignores the science.
Renewables are far from ready to power the world. Solar and wind can only work with massive amounts of backup power, mostly fossil fuels, to keep the world running when the wind dies down, it is cloudy or at night. Renewables mostly generate electricity, which is just one-fifth of our total energy use. The vast majority is non-electric, like transport, industrial processes and heat. That is why the world still gets 80% of its energy from fossil fuels. Even though private investment in clean-energy technology is increasing, the Prime Minister and his handlers see the weather as an opportunity to remake society, the so-called “great reset”.
Decarbonizing the Canadian economy with crushing carbon taxes means replacing in a few years fossil fuel infrastructure that was built up over decades. This will require hundreds of thousands of square miles of wind and solar farms, enough battery storage to keep the power flowing and at least doubling Canada's transmission line capability. The same laws that Liberal-sponsored environmental groups have used to block fossil fuel projects are being exploited to slow down the transition to clean energy like hydro and nuclear. The only credible environmental plans include nuclear and hydro power generation.
The carbon tax policy goal of achieving net-zero CO2 emissions brings crippling economic pain. Fossil fuel costs have shot up and will keep rising every time the acting minister of finance increases the carbon tax burden on Canadians.
While it may be convenient for the Prime Minister and his acting finance minister to blame Russia's invasion of Ukraine, the Prime Minister added $100 billion to our national debt before COVID and $500 billion to it before Russia even opened fire. All that borrowed money is driving up the cost of goods that we buy and the interest charged to service that debt.
662 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Oct/25/22 6:53:53 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, there are a lot of points in that speech that I would like to address, but perhaps I can invite people who are listening today, if they want to get the story on exactly what we are doing with our plan for the economy and the plan for the environment to visit my website at Terrybeech.mp.ca. I draft very fulsome reports, and anybody who is interested can go to those and follow up with me.
Our government does understand that Canadians are having trouble making ends meet. However, inflation is a global phenomenon. It is a lingering result of the COVID pandemic, which has been exacerbated by the war in Ukraine and by snarled supply chains that are affecting people and businesses right around the world, not just in Canada.
While Canada's inflation rate is less severe at 6.9% than that of many of our peers, like the United States at 8.2% and the United Kingdom, the euro area and the OECD all at above 10%, Canadians continue to experience a higher cost of living when they go to the grocery store, fill up their tanks and pay their rent. This is why we are moving forward with our affordability plan, which includes measures worth $12.1 billion to support the Canadians who need it the most, particularly those with lower incomes and those who are most exposed to inflation.
Our plan includes an enhanced Canada workers benefit for low- and modest-income workers, which will put up to $2,400 more into their pockets; cutting regulated child care fees by an average of 50% by the end of this year and to $10 a day by 2025; a 10% increase in old age security for seniors over the age of 75; dental care for Canadians with family incomes under $90,000 per year; a $500 payment, coming this year, to help people who have low incomes, are renting and are struggling with the cost of housing; doubling the GST credit for six months, which was supported by the member opposite and will go to 11 million households and over 50% of seniors; and, of course, our main support programs, including the Canada child benefit, OAS, GIS and others, which are indexed to inflation. That means those benefit will actually increase as the cost of living increases.
We are supporting Canadians while controlling our spending. The International Monetary Fund expects Canada to have the lowest federal government deficit as a percentage of GDP in the G7 this year, a track our country is forecasted to maintain for at least the next three years, and the lowest net-debt burden as a share of GDP in the G7. In fact, we have strengthened those advantages over the course of the pandemic.
Now, when it comes to pollution pricing, I would like to say that climate action is no longer a theoretical, political debate, it is an economic necessity, and a national price on pollution is the most effective market-based system for reducing greenhouse gas emissions. It is actually designed to work in a capitalistic society. In 2022-23, in the four provinces where the federal system price applies, climate incentive payments mean that life is more affordable for eight out of 10 Canadian families. In addition, families in rural and small communities are eligible to receive an extra 10%. In areas like B.C., my home province, where the price of gas has gone up by more than a dollar a litre over the last three years, the carbon price has gone up by only two cents.
This highlights the fact that Conservatives continue to mislead Canadians by ignoring 98% of the real problem when it comes to inflation and high energy prices. The reality is that most households are getting back more than they pay as a result of the federal pollution pricing system. We have a plan to grow the economy while lowering emissions and making life more affordable for Canadians.
670 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Oct/25/22 6:57:31 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, in the absence of affordable, effective fossil fuel replacements, the carbon tax policy espoused by the Liberal Party just means costlier power bills and lower growth rates to achieve unmeasurable changes in the earth's temperature.
The best long-term strategy would be to dramatically increase investment in energy research and development. This Conservative approach would be much more effective while likely being 10 times cheaper than the Liberal's approach of making life unaffordable. It is much more plausible developing countries around the world, including China and India where the bulk of pollution comes from, will implement it.
It is time for the Liberals to actually take responsibility for the carbon tax policy failure. A trillion-dollar debt is bone-crushing for our consumers. When will the Liberal Party reverse its inflationary policies and axe their tax increases?
141 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Oct/25/22 6:58:25 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, our government understands quite well that Canadians are feeling the effects of elevated inflation, which, as I outlined in my previous speech, is a global phenomenon. They can count on our government to continue supporting them through this cost of living crisis while remaining prudent fiscal managers.
However, the Conservatives, under their new leader, have presented basically a three-point affordability plan. First, they are suggesting that they would destroy the independence of our institutions that have been built up over generations, institutions like the Bank of Canada. Second, they would stop fighting climate change. Third, they are proposing to raid the pension benefits of our seniors by attacking agreements that we have made on the Canada pension plan. Their plan is not reasonable. It is not responsible and, really, it directly reflects their current leader.
138 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Oct/25/22 6:59:14 p.m.
- Watch
Uqaqtittiji, residential school survivors continue to live abuses from the government. The government says it is acting. Out of the 106 applications for burial searches, 84 have been approved. This is not enough.
This week in Winnipeg, researchers, academics and first nations communities from all over the country are gathering to share what they have learned in their search for unmarked graves at former residential schools. This is important work. The federal government has a responsibility to make good on its promises and do its part.
The funding currently promised is critical and validates what indigenous peoples had been saying for decades. For too long, first nations, Métis and Inuit were ignored when they shared their stories about the loved ones they lost to the residential school system. All these decades of being ignored have stifled the path to healing. It is outrageous that indigenous communities must beg and plead for funding. Delays on delivering the promises made must stop. Inuit, Métis and first nations have been given far too many promises that have not been acted on.
The Minister of Crown-Indigenous Relations said, “Some have said it could take up to 10 years, and the worst thing to see would be for any government to step away from that commitment. We will keep doing it, but at their pace.”
In budget 2022, there was one curious line item. It said the budget would provide $5.1 million to Public Safety Canada to ensure the Royal Canadian Mounted Police could support community-led responses to unmarked graves. By funding the RCMP instead of supporting indigenous-led organizations, such as Survivors' Secretariat, the government is supporting further practices of colonialism.
Why are these funds not directly funding indigenous peoples to heal from the shameful legacy of residential schools and colonialism?
306 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Madam Speaker, I acknowledge my hon. colleague from Nunavut for raising this very important question. I would like to start off by saying that I am speaking from my home in Eskasoni First Nation on unceded Mi'kmaq territory.
The member is right that this is an important issue, and our government certainly needs to do more. That is why, as part of our commitment to the many Truth and Reconciliation Commission's calls to action that talk about justice, health and the need for us to do more on burial searches, we have made available the funding that coincides with them.
Further to that, my colleague and I share the same passion in making sure that we are following through on our calls to action. That is why Bill C-29, which we are currently moving forward with, would ensure that we have an independent oversight committee that is funded for years to come to ensure that it is not just the government holding itself accountable; it is the survivors themselves.
We owe this duty to the survivors. We owe this duty to indigenous communities across Canada. I come from a family that has been affected by residential schools. My oldest aunt went to those schools, as did my cousins and my uncle. We owe them healing. We know that our communities need more of it and we know there are important areas around healing.
Budget 2021 announced $43.7 million over five years, starting last fiscal year, to move forward with this work. We are currently working with the Assembly of First Nations on not only making sure that there is healing but making sure that our communities are safe and that we put money, almost $1 billion, toward indigenous justice and indigenous policing. We are beginning to meet with stakeholders. We are in the process of talking with stakeholders to make sure they are part of the process, because we do not want paternal, government-knows-best solutions. We want solutions that are brought by the indigenous communities themselves.
I would also like to talk about some of the achievements of our government. Before I end my time, I want to make sure to recognize that we are also moving forward on murdered and missing indigenous women. One of my proudest moments was a call I made to the Nova Scotia Native Women’s Association to let them know they would get the funding they requested for a resilience centre in Nova Scotia, the first of its kind in this country, to keep indigenous women safe in the Atlantic provinces. I remember the tears on the other side. They were saying they had been waiting for this for 30 years. I would also like to acknowledge that our government just recently announced $8.4 million for Velma's House, in Winnipeg, for a 24-7 safe space in emergency shelters and transition homes for indigenous women.
Initiatives like these show the difference we can make when we work together on a common goal. Much more needs to be done, and I look forward to working with the member opposite to do that.
526 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Oct/25/22 7:05:25 p.m.
- Watch
Uqaqtittiji, we are told there is no relationship more important than the one with indigenous peoples, yet the government is funding law enforcement that upholds the systemic racism that has existed for too long. To this day, these institutions have failed to adequately respond to important work led by indigenous peoples, including the MMIWG calls for justice.
If the federal government will not divert these funds from its colonial institutions, how will it ensure that such agencies discontinue the systemic racism it continues to perpetuate?
85 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Oct/25/22 7:06:09 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, I understand the question and I understand the intent of it. However, what we have seen in many of our indigenous communities as a result of intergenerational trauma is that indigenous communities are far more likely to be violent, far more likely to see abuses and far more likely to need indigenous policing and policing of all types.
We feel that the RCMP is part of that answer. In fact, many indigenous communities are asking for increased policing. We have various methods of doing that, the RCMP being one, but we also have our commitment of $1 billion toward enhancing indigenous policing. It is something we are striving to do.
We know we are not there yet, so we have to work within the means we have and with the tool kit we have. That is why our government continues to be committed to this.
147 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Oct/25/22 7:07:06 p.m.
- Watch
The motion that the House do now adjourn is deemed to have been adopted. Accordingly the House stands adjourned until tomorrow at 2 p.m. pursuant to Standing Order 24(1).
(The House adjourned at 7:07 p.m.)
42 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- menumenu
- notificationsnotifications
- home
- mailmail
- searchsearch
