SoVote

Decentralized Democracy

Hon. Arif Virani

  • Member of Parliament
  • Minister of Justice Attorney General of Canada
  • Liberal
  • Parkdale—High Park
  • Ontario
  • Voting Attendance: 64%
  • Expenses Last Quarter: $120,537.19

  • Government Page
  • Feb/26/24 3:33:20 p.m.
  • Watch
  • Re: Bill S-13 
moved that Bill S-13, An Act to amend the Interpretation Act and to make related amendments to other Acts be now read the first time and printed.
28 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • Feb/13/24 10:36:17 a.m.
  • Watch
Mr. Speaker, what I can add to the conversation I just had with my colleague across the way is that we created expert panels to study several aspects of expanding medical assistance in dying. Experts conducted a study on advance requests. They found that it is extremely complex when we talk in the present about articulating a desire to seek medical assistance in dying, added to the fact that a person might submit a request 30 or 40 years ahead of time. Given the context, their situation, condition and wishes could change. This said, Quebec has already addressed the issue, and a bill has been introduced in the province. We are well aware of this, and we are starting a discussion with Quebec. Discussions will be held. We have a Criminal Code that applies across the country. Consequently, the question has to be approached the same way we dealt with the other aspects, meaning nationally. This is what we did when we prudently undertook consultations while taking the necessary precautions.
170 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • Feb/13/24 10:30:44 a.m.
  • Watch
Mr. Speaker, I want to thank the member for Esquimalt—Saanich—Sooke for his contributions today and every day, particularly on the justice committee and on the joint mixed committee. I agree with him that this is probably the most challenging and personal issue that any of us has touched, particularly for those who were elected in the class of 2015, who have been dealing with this for the last eight years. Because what is at issue is so significant, because the consequences are so permanent by definition, it is critical to get it right and to proceed in a prudent manner. Some of those things are outlined in the charter statement we have tabled in the House. It talks about the screening for decision-making capacity being particularly difficult in the context because of the symptoms of the person's condition or because their life experiences can impact their ability to understand and appreciate the decision they are about to make. Further, feelings of hopelessness and wishing to die are common symptoms of some mental illnesses, which can make it difficult for even an experienced practitioner to distinguish between a wish to die that is fully autonomous and considered, and something that is a symptom of one's personal illness. Also, the course of a mental illness over time is very much less predictable than that of a physical illness. Last, and importantly, we do not have a record of evidence that has been built up in this country with respect to how the practice would unfold. Ensuring that we build up that record of evidence and that we build up the important curriculum and the uptake of that curriculum for the assessors and providers is critical. For these and many other reasons, we are adopting a position that we would proceed responsibility, cautiously and prudently in three years' time with the initiative, but also reconvene the joint committee on which the member has sat so it can assess system readiness about two years from now, prior to the three-year deadline's coming to the fore.
350 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • Feb/13/24 10:17:59 a.m.
  • Watch
Mr. Speaker, I thank the hon. member for Saanich—Gulf Islands for her contributions today and every day in the chamber. She outlines exactly the balance that we are trying to craft, and have tried to craft since 2016, in response to the Carter decision. Those are basically two different ideas: promoting the dignity and the autonomy of an individual in this country, and ensuring that we are protecting vulnerable people with adequate safeguards so they are not victimized. In this context, the safeguards and the protection are critical in the context of those who are mentally ill. That has been guiding theme here. In addition to the provinces and territories that have spoken up about the lack of system readiness, we have also heard from the Canadian Mental Health Association and from the Centre for Addiction and Mental Health that they are also not ready and concur with the provinces' and territories' assessments. With respect to the last point raised by the member for Saanich—Gulf Islands, she talked about mental health supports. This is critical now more than ever, particularly coming out of the COVID pandemic. What I would say to her is that when we reached a deal about one year ago to provide a record number of dollars in support of the Canadian health care system, we outlined certain parameters for that support. One of the pillars of that support was to support mental health and the mental health needs of Canadians. That is a fundamental priority for us and will remain so.
259 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • Feb/13/24 10:14:31 a.m.
  • Watch
Mr. Speaker, I thank the hon. member for his contributions today and every day in this Chamber. The journey has been a detailed one, a responsible one and a prudent one. What we understand, as a government and as parliamentarians, is that mental illness causes suffering, and that suffering is equivalent to physical suffering. We also understand people have decision-making capacity, including those who are mentally ill. We also understand that, as a federal government in a federation where the health care system and the delivery of health care is primarily the jurisdiction of provinces, proceeding in a situation where the provinces have spoken with one voice, saying that provinces and territories are not ready to deliver medical assistance in dying for people who have mental illness as their sole underlying condition, in that context, we have to listen to those provinces and work with those provinces to help them with their readiness. The provinces have spoken uniformly to the Minister of Health and to myself about their lack of readiness and about the fact that more time would be beneficial to ensure that there is better take-up of the curriculum and that supports are in place for those who would assess and provide MAID, and that there is more understanding of how those safeguards would be implemented in the context of an individual who has mental illness as their sole underlying condition. Based on that, we are seeking, through this chamber and through the upper chamber, an extension of three years. That would be a prudent course when the situation is very significant, when the interests are significant and when then consequences are very permanent.
278 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • Dec/14/23 2:56:33 p.m.
  • Watch
Mr. Speaker, when it comes to food security, we always have to remember that the breadbasket of the world is a country called Ukraine. I am going to use the name of that country deliberately because, when one cannot— Some hon. members: Oh, oh!
45 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border