- Member of Parliament
- Member of Parliament
- Conservative
- Lethbridge
- Alberta
- Voting Attendance: 65%
- Expenses Last Quarter: $131,565.29
- Government Page
Madam Speaker, it is truly a pleasure to have the opportunity to stand in this place to speak to Bill S-219.
As mentioned, the bill calls for national ribbon skirt day to be declared as a part of our commemorative activity on January 4 of each year. It is an opportunity for so much more than just giving importance to a piece of clothing. It is what that piece of clothing or that article points to. It is what it symbolizes. It is what it represents. It is the power within, so it is that I wish to speak to today.
I believe that to gain an appreciation for the bill, we really have to understand a bit of history. There is a recent past, there is a distant past, and then there is today and a way forward. If members will bear with me, I would like to just go through a few of my reflections on those items.
A few years ago there was a young girl by the name of Isabella Kulak. She was a young girl from Cote First Nation, which is in Saskatchewan. She was a riveting young woman and continues to be, and she wore a ribbon skirt to school one day. Unfortunately, an educator commented negatively and told this young women that it was an inappropriate item to wear on what was called “formal day”.
This girl, who was about eight years old at the time, I believe, was berated and shamed in front of her peers and her teachers, which is devastating for a young girl to experience, especially not just the action of the berating and the shame but the fact that it was so deeply attached to her culture, her history and her way of life. The fact that she would be attacked on that, of course, had an impact on this little girl's heart. Her parents very bravely took this story and, with courage, shared it on social media. From there, it spurred a movement.
It captured the attention of not just a few within her city or neighbourhood, but it actually managed to capture the attention of a country and a nation. What is so powerful, and why I am perhaps brought to tears a bit with this story, is that this young girl demonstrated courage and, supported by her parents, she was able to draw attention to something that is so important in our country right now, which is the disadvantage indigenous folks find themselves in and the fact that there are still these persisting inequalities within Canadian society.
As much as it is a ribbon skirt, it is so much more that we would be commemorating through the bill before us and its call for January 4 to be declared national ribbon skirt day.
I wish to share the words of Isabella with the House today and with the Canadian public. She wrote a letter to the Senator from whom the bill originated. Isabella wrote:
My name is Isabella Susanne Kulak and I would like to start off by telling you what the ribbon skirt means to me. The ribbon skirt represents strength, resiliency, cultural identity and womanhood. When I wear my ribbon skirt I feel confident and proud to be a young indigenous girl.
When I was 8 years old I was gifted my very own ribbon skirt from my auntie.... I wore it with pride and honour to my traditional ceremonies and pow wows. On December 18, 2020 it was formal day at Kamsack Comprehensive Institute where I attend school, so I chose to wear my ribbon skirt just like my older sister Gerri. When I got to school a teacher assistant commented on it and said it didn’t even match my shirt and maybe next formal day I should wear something else like another girl was wearing and pointed at her. Those words made me feel pressured to be someone I am not. I eventually took off my skirt as I felt shamed.
Today I no longer feel shamed and I feel proud and powerful enough to move mountains because I know that people from around the world are standing with me. I am very grateful to be Canadian, to be Indian and to represent my people by wearing my ribbon skirt proudly! Thank you to Senator McCallum and to all the people who supported me from around the world, from Canada and from all the First Nations across the nations of the earth.
Sincerely Isabella
It is so important to read her words into the record. I could stand here and talk about the importance of this day or the significance of the skirt, and I will comment on that to some extent, but what is so much more important are the words of this girl who initiated the movement.
To Isabella and many indigenous women across this country, the ribbon skirt serves as a powerful declaration of what it is to be female, what it is to hold a feminine spirit: the strength, the power, the beauty, the resilience, the ability to give and maintain life. These are all parts of what it celebrates.
The ribbon skirt is about indigenous culture, tradition, history and a way of life. The skirt's meaning, yes, does vary from person to person and, of course, the way that it is put together and the colours that are used also vary from person to person. It is meant to be just as unique as the individual who wears it. Because of Isabella, other young girls and women of all ages are now once again able to wear the skirt as a declaration of their power, their resilience and their cultural identity. That is something that is incredibly powerful.
I would like to talk about the more distant past, and it is again with some sorrow that I do because Isabella's actions are particularly powerful when considered against the backdrop of what has happened in this country. In 1885, the potlatch ban was put in place. It actually prevented indigenous folks from being able to wear ribbon skirts. The fact that this eight-year-old girl bravely put one on and wore it to school is profound. Ribbon skirts, along with ceremonial items, were outlawed in that original ban. For us as a culture to once again be able to embrace that and say with a united heart that we accept them and celebrate them is so important today.
While national ribbon skirt day is an important opportunity to celebrate indigenous women and their incredible strength in the face of colonialism, more has to be done. It is one thing to commemorate culture, history, a way of life and the power that is within women, but it is another thing to take concrete action. In this place, we have heard the government talk a lot about missing and murdered indigenous women and, in fact, three years ago a report was done. It is significant. We are missing an integral part of our population in this country. What action has been taken?
Further to that, we have folks in this country who are living without potable water. The members opposite enjoy talking about throwing money at the problem, but getting it resolved has not happened. We have a housing issue in this country. Up north, there are 15 people living in a household. There is mould growing up walls. There are conditions that are not okay. What are we doing about that?
Furthermore, there are so many mental health concerns that have been expressed by indigenous communities. They are asking for assistance. They are asking for treatment with regard to addiction. These folks are also asking for a commitment to moving forward in reconciliation. It takes so much more than just promising funding or delivering good talking points.
As much as this bill is about the ribbon skirt, as much as it is about the courage of Isabella, as much as it is about celebrating culture, history and identity, it is also about calling this place to a way forward, a way forward that allows for economic prosperity among indigenous folks in Canada and allows us to move forward truly reconciled and united toward a vibrant future.
1387 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Oct/31/22 5:32:08 p.m.
- Watch
- Re: Bill S-5
Madam Speaker, I believe that if we are serious about wanting to make sure that we are taking care of our health as Canadians but also the health of world, which should be at least, in part, our endeavour, then we do need to consider our sources pertaining to oil and gas.
When we bring in, from countries that do not have high environmental standards or do not treat people with the utmost respect for human rights, then we are actually functioning in an unethical manner ourselves. We have an opportunity to correct that by—
96 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Oct/31/22 5:30:53 p.m.
- Watch
- Re: Bill S-5
Madam Speaker, basically, the entirety of my speech talked about the provision in the preamble around guaranteeing Canadians the right to a healthy environment. It is in the preamble, which indicates that the government lacks the courage to put it in the bill and be held accountable for that.
Perhaps we could start there when it comes to amending this bill.
61 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Oct/31/22 5:30:07 p.m.
- Watch
- Re: Bill S-5
3 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Oct/31/22 5:29:45 p.m.
- Watch
- Re: Bill S-5
Madam Speaker, the conversation in the House today has to do with what the government is doing concerning the environment—
Some hon. members: Oh, oh!
26 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Oct/31/22 5:28:20 p.m.
- Watch
- Re: Bill S-5
Madam Speaker, I do love the number zero. Let us talk about the accomplishments in terms of protecting the environment in Canada. It is zero. Let us talk about the units of carbon that have been reduced in terms of emissions because of the Liberals' carbon tax. Wait, that number is zero as well. Shall I continue? I like the number zero as well.
The point is that the current policies that are being implemented by the government do not help to create a healthy environment for Canadians. Instead, they are punitive in nature. Canadians are paying through the roof. They are struggling. They deserve better.
106 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Oct/31/22 5:17:36 p.m.
- Watch
- Re: Bill S-5
Madam Speaker, the bill we have in front of us today, Bill S-5, has to do with environmental protection. It has to do with updating important documentation having to do with how we define toxins, which is long overdue. We know that; it has been mentioned here in the House before. It has been true since the 1990s. Unfortunately, though, the government across the way will claim that it wants to get the bill through quickly and that the Conservatives are stalling it, when the fact of the matter is that the Liberals have had five years to work on legislation and get it through the House. They have not taken that seriously. They have been slow.
Further to that, in the middle of those five years there were several elections, one of them called completely unnecessarily. Of course, that was in the fall of 2021 in the middle of a pandemic, when individuals were concerned for their health, safety and well-being. Interestingly enough, part of the bill has to do with health, which I will get to in just a moment, yet the Liberals decided that would be a good time to call an election.
Of course, elections have a way of stalling things. They have a way of putting aside legislation and making it so that it is no longer standing. It has to be called back once Parliament resumes, so here we are talking about Bill S-5. Again, it is something that has been in process for about five years. It did not need to be that way, but it was. Nevertheless, let us jump into the bill and discuss it.
There are a couple of things I want to draw attention to. Certainly there would be some new definitions brought about through this legislation, and I think overall my colleagues and I can agree to that. We see where there is some simplification achieved and we can get behind it. That said, there were many amendments made in the Senate before the bill came this way, which is the opposite of how things normally work, and we have some issues with those amendments. We will be looking to create some change around them to make sure Canadians are better advocated for going forward, but of course that will come at a later stage.
For today, I wish to speak to a part in the preamble of the bill. The preamble of the bill says that it is committed to prioritizing a healthy environment and that this is a right Canadians should have guaranteed for them. Here is the thing. First off, instead of putting this in the preamble, it should have been in the body of the legislation if it is going to have teeth, because we know that when it comes to courts of law, a judge does not make a decision based on a preamble; a judge makes a decision based on what is in the actual bill. If the current government is looking to truly be held accountable in making sure Canadians enjoy a healthy environment, it should have the courage to put this into the main component of the bill rather than in the preamble. Putting it in the preamble is simply another nicety, another platitude.
Speaking of that, we already have many examples. Let us look at the carbon tax, for example. With the carbon tax, there is a lot of fluffy language with regard to how the it is somehow making a difference or will make a difference, yet when we look at the actual facts, we see carbon emissions have not been reduced in our country. Actually, they have increased, so we have to ask this question: Why is there a carbon tax? We do not know, yet it continues to be in place. In fact, it is not just to be maintained but is actually increasing year over year every single April 1. That is April Fool's Day, but no one is really laughing because it is expensive to pay the carbon tax.
Canadians are reasonable people, and I think they can get behind something, even if it penalizes them a bit, if they know it is going to make a measurable or meaningful difference for them. However, the fact of the matter is that we have a report from the commissioner of the environment that says the current government has been given a failing grade on its environmental goals or objectives. It has not met any of them. This is coming out of reports that are at arm's length. I did not make this up.
Here is the government using platitudes, niceties and language that appears to do something but actually does nothing. Therefore, here we are again. We have this piece of legislation and in the preamble is this commitment to a healthy environment. However, the courage is lacking to give it teeth and to ensure that it happens.
Let us talk about that. If we were to truly define this vague term “healthy environment”, what might that look like in Canada? What might Canadians be able to anticipate if we were to create a healthy environment? Perhaps it would mean that we take a look not only at the thing but also at the context. For example, with plastics, those opposite me would like to put out language, and have put out language, that demonizes plastics.
However, to consider plastics in context, let us look at plastics in the way that they were used during the pandemic. During the pandemic, they were used to cover instruments in hospitals. Today they are used to cover instruments in hospitals. They are used for equipment in hospitals. They are used in daily practice to ensure that people are kept healthy. In a hospital are they toxic?
Further, during the pandemic when people were given plastic forks or plastic spoons because they could not eat in a restaurant but still needed to consume food, was that toxic? Perhaps it is, but maybe there needs to be a further conversation around context. Perhaps it is not adequate to demonize something altogether without considering time and place.
Furthermore, let us talk about a healthy environment and LNG or liquefied natural gas. Let us talk about, if we were to move entirely over to LNG and off of coal, the incredible difference it would make in terms of creating a healthy, vibrant Canada. However, the members opposite do not want to talk about that because to them oil and gas is bad. We would rather turn a blind eye to the truth that we continue to use coal because to talk about that is inconvenient. We do not want to talk about that.
We want to talk about all this greenism over here, all these plans over here and all this nice language that we have over here. Look over here at the shiny item. However, we do not actually want to acknowledge the truth, which is to say we have something incredible called LNG. We could use it to get off coal, clean up the environment and contribute to health.
Here is another one. The government wants to impose a carbon tax and it is tripling by 2030. That will have a huge impact on Canadians. The government has said that this is going to make a meaningful difference. We have already discovered that it has not and it will not.
Meanwhile, if we were to develop oil and gas in our country, to get pipelines into the ground and to get product to market, that would be a huge help in creating a healthy environment. Do members want to know how? The growing demand would then be met domestically, rather than having to bring it in from Saudi Arabia or Russia.
Let us talk about Saudi Arabia or Russia for a moment. There are no environmental standards. There are no human rights standards. Instead, the current government is deciding to ship in blood oil because the demand for fossil fuels is not going anywhere. It only continues to grow. Is that contributing to a healthy environment? We will just bring all the blood oil over from Saudi Arabia. Let us continue to fund Putin and his war machine against Ukraine. Is that a healthy environment?
I look forward to the government giving a definition to what it means by the right to a healthy environment. It certainly should be a lot broader than the niceties or the platitudes that it uses to describe its carbon tax.
1433 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- menumenu
- notificationsnotifications
- home
- mailmail
- searchsearch
