Hon. Dennis Glen Patterson: Honourable senators, I am probably not known to often praise our current federal government, but when it is deserved I am very willing to do that.

Last October, when fuel contamination in Nunavut’s capital city’s water system made our water undrinkable, a crisis that lasted 60 days happened — not only during the challenges of managing the pandemic crisis but also coinciding with the onset of winter, when an otherwise alternative local water supply at the nearby Sylvia Grinnell River was rapidly freezing.

The City of Iqaluit applied for relief under the federal government’s Disaster Mitigation and Adaptation Fund. On April 1, 2022, Prime Minister Trudeau, in a virtual press conference held in Iqaluit, announced to the Iqaluit mayor and council the contribution of $214 million from that fund. That funding will allow the city to create a new water reservoir above Lake Geraldine and to improve the existing water distribution system, which has been ruptured by climate change. Since first applied for, the funds were even increased to take into account cost inflation since the first engineering cost estimate was done.

In this connection, I wish to particularly commend our Minister of Northern Affairs, the Honourable Dan Vandal, and Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs, Infrastructure and Communities, the Honourable Dominic LeBlanc, for quickly responding to this serious water crisis that impacted my home community of Iqaluit.

I’d like to also acknowledge the support of the Senate Standing Committee on National Finance, which graciously allowed me to ask a question, through Senate colleague and Chair Percy Mockler. We asked Minister Freeland to acknowledge the urgent requirement for capital funding — then estimated at $190 million to repair Iqaluit’s water system — when she appeared at that committee’s hearings during the crisis and following the fall economic update.

The Mayor of Iqaluit, Kenny Bell, indefatigably travelled to Ottawa to lobby the federal government and, in his characteristic straightforward fashion at a press conference, scolded a local reporter who asked why it had taken so long to address Iqaluit’s longstanding water issues caused by climate change. The mayor noted how “. . . amazing and unbelievably fast” the federal response had been once the formal application was submitted.

I, too, am so grateful for Canada’s response to this water crisis in Nunavut’s capital community but, in saying that, I want to acknowledge that most of Nunavut’s 24 other communities are still out of compliance with their existing water licences, as well as many First Nations communities in Southern Canada that have long laboured under boil water advisories.

Thank you, qujannamimariaaluk. Taima.

Hon. Dennis Glen Patterson: Honourable senators, I rise today to speak to Bill S-203, An Act respecting a federal framework on autism spectrum disorder.

I’d like to begin today by telling senators the story of William McLaren. I am thankful to his mom, Claudine, who works for me as my director of parliamentary affairs, for giving me permission to share this with you all.

Will was born fully blind due to a relatively rare diagnosis that is not preventable and very hard to detect. Basically, his optic nerves and the part of his brain that they would connect to did not fully form.

As a result of his blindness, Will was followed by many different services at the Ottawa Children’s Treatment Centre and it was there, at the age of 4, that it was first suggested Will might be autistic. However, it’s hard to make a diagnosis at such an early age. It also requires a certain expertise to make such a diagnosis in a blind child because so-called blindisms are very similar to indicators of autism such as texture aversions, not making eye contact when you speak to others, and getting overstimulated easily.

His parents decided to wait until he was older to explore the potential autism further but were hyper-aware of potential indicators and were able to work autism-intervention strategies into their son’s individual education plan, or IEP.

Later, at the age of 7, it became apparent that it was time to revisit this possibility. The wait time, however, for a free assessment by the school board was years long and there was no expertise within the school board to make a diagnosis of a blind child. Thankfully, Will’s parents were fortunate enough to have the resources to find a private psychologist who was able to diagnose him.

Even so, with COVID restrictions for external professionals entering schools, the assessment has taken over a year to complete and cost $2,500. While they are still awaiting the final assessment report, they and the school have been told to proceed with an unofficial diagnosis until all the paperwork could be completed. Thanks to the excellent support of his teachers, education assistants, principal and vice principal at Carleton Heights Public School, he has been able to flourish.

Colleagues, this story is significant because, while it is a good news story for Will, there are many instances where this story could have taken a tragic turn for many others. It’s possible that parents would not have received any early indication of autism and not known what to look out for as their child grew and developed. Parents may not have had the advocacy skills required to put in place a comprehensive IEP or may have faced resistance within the school to implementing autism intervention strategies ahead of a final diagnosis.

Other potential barriers to accessing services include the $2,500 private assessment fee, which may have prevented many families from jumping the long queue to access services. Geographical considerations may have limited the amount, type or quality of services available. This is particularly true for families with children who are multiply involved, that is, who have two or more diagnoses, because they would often require access to specialized services and professionals.

What Bill S-203 would do is require the government to create a national framework on autism spectrum disorder based on consultations with various stakeholders. While the bill lists several points for inclusion in the framework and outlines many of the stakeholders that should be included in the consultation process, it is important to note that amendments I proposed, and that were subsequently accepted, clearly noted that these lists under clauses 2 and 3 are not exhaustive. I agree with Senator Housakos’ approach of not being overly prescriptive so that the minister has flexibility to decide what issues and which stakeholders should be included.

I feel it important to underscore the fact that this is not the framework, this is the mechanism to create it. The bill also sets out accountability measures to ensure that the framework is created within 18 months of Royal Assent. It also requires a review after five years of that framework being tabled to study the efficacy of those measures that had been implemented and to get a response as to why other measures may not have been implemented since the framework’s tabling.

It is my hope that senators see the importance of this bill and the need to move it through our chamber expeditiously so that we can make this a law and begin the hard work of addressing the gaps and barriers that families and neurodivergent persons face every day, as I have described in Will’s case.

We heard in committee how previous attempts to create a similar framework have failed, so I want to congratulate Senator Housakos as sponsor and Senator Loffreda who, though given the title of critic, has been very supportive of this bill. I know that this topic is personal for many senators in this chamber and it is my sincere hope that this bill will succeed where many other efforts have failed. The next step to that goal is passing this bill in our chamber — hopefully today.

Thank you, honourable senators. Qujannamiik.