- Member of Parliament
- NDP
- North Island—Powell River
- British Columbia
- Voting Attendance: 65%
- Expenses Last Quarter: $145,542.18
- Government Page
Mr. Speaker, I am very happy to be here today as the seniors critic for the NDP to talk about Bill C-295, an act to amend the Criminal Code targeted at neglect of vulnerable adults.
This bill would do two things. First, it would amend the Criminal Code to create a specific offence for long-term care facilities, their owners and managers to fail to provide the necessaries of life to residents of the facilities. Second, it would allow the court to make an order prohibiting the owners and the managers of such facilities from being, through employment or volunteering, in charge of or in a position of trust or authority towards vulnerable adults and to consider as an aggravating factor for the purpose of sentencing the fact that an organization failed to perform the legal duty that it owed to a vulnerable adult.
I am going to be in support of this bill. We saw dreadful outcomes during the pandemic. So many seniors across this country faced challenges that we cannot imagine and then there were deaths beyond our imagination. It is really important, as we remember this time, to remember the men and women in uniform who serve this country, who were sent in to some long-term care facilities and saw things they were horrified to see in their own country.
It is really important to understand that when we ask those in our military to step up for us, they are used to stepping up outside of our country in these kinds of circumstances. They were in this country and saw seniors who had died just because of neglect, because they were dehydrated. This is Canada and that should never happen. Those folks did a huge service to us, something I hope they never have to do in their own country again.
It is also important to point out that the vast majority of seniors never enter long-term care. That is important. I hear from the Seniors Advocate in British Columbia all the time that we should remember most people stay at home and that is where they end their lives. However, when seniors move into such facilities, families and loved ones need to know those people are safe and that standards are in place, something they can put their trust in.
We know that sometimes families move their loved ones to be closer to them from one province or territory to another. What is surprising is that the standards are different in each part of this country, which really leaves increased vulnerability. I appreciate that the government did table some long-term care standards, but the thing that was terrifying to me is that they are voluntary. A lot of good work was done in looking at those standards, making sure they made sense for long-term care, and now we see that they are voluntary.
This worries me because it provides a huge risk to seniors and the people who love them most. Again and again, we see loved ones doing the best that they can. If they live far away or there are any kinds of challenges, knowing that their loved one is in a long-term care facility and not getting the support that they want makes people feel ill.
I am going to quote something important by Candace Rennick, CUPE's national secretary-treasurer, who said:
Voluntary standards did not protect the 17,000 residents of long-term care homes who have died so far because of COVID-19. Canadians want better protections for seniors. This country needs standards that are backed by the force of law. People need to know that their loved ones will spend their last days living with dignity and respect. They need to know that there will be penalties and consequences for long-term care service providers that don’t follow the rules.
If all we have in this country is a national voluntary standard, there will never be the level of accountability that I think Canadians want to see.
This bill would amend the Criminal Code, but I am afraid that it will not do all that it must to protect seniors. We need more long-term support for them and a practice of having more accountability. What this really means to me is that when seniors die in this situation, there need to be actual charges laid, and we are not seeing that. We are seeing families taking on long-term care facilities, and that is not right. There needs to be a process and we need to start having charges laid. That is a real deterrent.
Graham Webb, executive director and former staff lawyer of the Advocacy Centre for the Elderly, has called the Criminal Code amendments “a very viable approach”. However, he said, “I'm really not aware of a single charge ever having being laid for the neglect of a long-term care resident. I think it’s important that the criminal justice system is able to respond when we see such flagrant cases of institutional abuse and neglect of older adults.”
I think that is startling. Even if we see a minor change to the code, it is still not fulfilling the other end, which is the actual movement toward laying those charges and holding people accountable.
Members know just as well as I do that when people are held to account, other people observing start paying attention. I think it is shameful that in this country seniors are so vulnerable that they can be sacrificed without a thought. They built our country. We owe them so much more, and we owe them dignity.
One of the things I found particularly painful in my role as the seniors critic is how many people with loved ones in a seniors facility have come to my door and talked about how hard they worked to try to look after them. They could not always be there the way they wanted to, because they had to work or because they had children. Then, when they went to visit, they saw things that horrified them, and they fought in that system the best that they could and with everything they had. Now that their loved one is gone, the pain is so raw that they do not want to talk about it because of the guilt they feel. They feel guilt because our system is broken. That is wrong, and that is why we must fix this.
To me, it goes back to the simple reality that we need to see the long-term care standards in legislation. We need to raise the bar. I get that every province and territory wants to do their own thing. I respect that, but let us make this the bar. If any province or territory wants to be higher than that bar, good for them. Let us make sure that no senior in all of Canada falls below it. Let us make sure that no family is in a position that they would think of moving their loved one from one province to another, simply so that they get better care. That is ridiculous.
I think Canadians need to listen to those on the front lines. For example, Natalie Mehra, executive director of the Ontario Health Coalition, noted that there has been “no consequence whatsoever” for the abuse and neglect that was exposed during the pandemic, or for the needless deaths of residents due to poor infection control and non-COVID-19 reasons, such as dehydration and starvation. How could a senior be starved to death in this country? This is Canada. She further noted, “I think we need to search our conscience if the lives of the elderly are not worth a formal government bill and real change with teeth.”
As we vote on the bill before us, which hopefully people will support because it is a small change in the right direction, I hope we all think about our commitment to the people who built this country. Those people are increasingly vulnerable as they age. Think about the hard-working families who are doing everything they can to support that loved one. Think about the fact that we still do not have legislation that has teeth so that we can make sure to support seniors as they age.
In closing, as a person who represents a rural and remote community, we also have to recognize that those in small communities often see their loved ones go far away to get long-term care. They have to travel a great distance, which means they cannot be with them. Let us all fight to make sure that wherever one's loved is, they are safe.
1470 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Madam Speaker, I am honoured to be here today to speak to Bill C-224. I want to acknowledge the member who has tabled it. I am proud to serve on the Standing Committee on Procedure and House Affairs with her and really respect my Liberal friend. This is a testimony of places where collectively all parties can come together and recognize a need in our country and work together to try to make it a little bit better.
This bill provides for the development of a national framework designed to raise awareness of cancers linked to firefighting and to support improved access for firefighters to cancer prevention and treatment. It would also designate the month of January in every year as the firefighter cancer awareness month.
We know firefighters are killed by cancer around three times more than the general population and that cancer rates among firefighters increase dramatically as they age. This is an important part to remember. We are asking these people to step in the line for us and the outcomes for them are often very dangerous.
Sadly, there is inconsistent recognition of occupational cancers of firefighters across Canada, with each province and territory having a different method. This really concerns me, because we ask these folks to run into the burning building as we are running out, and we need to make sure their health is cared for in a much more effective way.
Brad Collicutt, president of IAFF Local 1298 from the Powell River firefighters, sent me a chart today of the B.C. firefighters' presumptive coverage. It states the years of cumulative employment required to claim coverage for illnesses. He said to me, “Shortened latency periods are now required as there are more and more toxic chemicals involved with fires. Firefighters are being hit with cancers faster and sooner, and latency periods need to be updated. These periods vary across Canada from province to province. This needs to change. We need consistency. For example, a member who has served 14 years and nine months is not eligible for benefits because there is a 15-year minimum service deadline.”
Firefighters simply need better. In small communities in particular, firefighters are called out to fill in a lot of other gaps in service in the communities. Fire Chief Dan Verdun, from Campbell River, noted that Campbell River has seen a significant increase in medical-type calls. Last year, out of the 3,600 calls in the Campbell River area, 2,000 were due to medical-type calls. He attributes this to the increasing shortfalls in the health care system that are being experienced across the riding. This is very concerning, because it takes up a lot of time and resources. It is something we need to look at. I know it is outside the realm of this bill, but health care concerns are growing and the impacts are tremendous and far-reaching.
This is seen in other communities in my riding. Fire Chief Brent Borg, from Port Hardy, said that there has been an increase in medical-type calls. They are now doing ambulance assist calls only, and the fire chief is really concerned that the risk is out there for people with medical needs who may or may not have the required assistance provided to them.
Fire Chief Rob McWilliam, from Gillies Bay Fire Department, is concerned about the realities they are seeing around the well-being of their members. The longer they serve, the worse the outcomes. A couple of long-term firefighters have died from cancer, and the former fire chief died from a brain tumour. He shared that a long-time firefighter with 10 years of experience died just last year. His cancer was occupation-related, in his opinion, but he was denied benefits because he had not been exposed for the minimum of 15 years. He said, “The length of exposure time they are looking for is just ridiculous.”
These folks know that the safety of their members is key and that their health is at risk just by the fact that they do their job, so they invest significant time in safety practices due to the higher instances of cancer-related deaths, including things like decontamination units and scrub-down areas. Fire Chief Borg spoke passionately about the changes they have made to care for their members over these many years.
The amount of work and dedication really should be admired and recognized. Action is the next step that needs to happen to acknowledge the long-term health outcomes of firefighters.
We ask them to deal with emergency issues and to run toward burning buildings while we are running out of them. This bill would do more to acknowledge the health outcomes of those actions. It is a start, but it is certainly not the bar of dignity they deserve. I know all of us in the House will continue to work on that.
Several months ago in my riding, a fire broke out in a trailer park in Gold River. The fire department volunteers were called and they came. The Campbell River fire station was also dispatched. It is over an hour away, so there were only volunteers on the scene.
They did an amazing job. They prevented what was already a terrible situation from becoming so much worse. I was honoured to meet with Fire Chief John McPherson and several members of his team. The Campbell River firefighters were very impressed with the Gold River firefighters' ability to do the job. We are so lucky to have them in our community. Their dedication is beyond reproach.
I am grateful for these firefighters, and I want to see their health recognized more. Volunteer firefighters need far more acknowledgement for the important work they do and for the commitments they make to our communities.
I hope that all members in this place will support my friend, the member for Courtenay—Alberni, with his private member's bill, Bill C-310. I have seconded this bill because it addresses key issues that really matter to people in my riding.
We know that volunteer firefighters are about 83% of Canada's total firefighting essential first responders. In my riding of North Island—Powell River, many of our fire stations are full of volunteers. This is how small communities work. They help each other.
Bill C-310 addresses the fact that the tax code of Canada currently allows volunteer firefighters, and search and rescue volunteers, to claim a $3,000 tax credit if 200 hours of volunteer service were completed within the calendar year.
In my opinion, this is not respectful of the work these people do. In fact, this works out to a mere $450 a year that we allow these essential workers, these volunteers, to keep as income from their regular jobs. They work to keep us and our communities safe for about $2.25 an hour.
If they volunteer more than 200 hours, which many do, this tax credit becomes even less. I want to be clear. These folks work their everyday job and then add hours of volunteer time to protect our communities.
These essential volunteers not only put their lives and health on the line, and give their time, training and efforts to Canadians, but also allow communities to keep property taxes lower than if the paid service were required. Again, it is an example of the commitment small communities have.
Bill C-310 would increase the tax credit to $10,000. This is about dignity, and this would allow these essential volunteers to keep more of their hard-earned money, which is likely to be spent in the community they live in. It would help retain these volunteers in a time when volunteerism is decreasing. If anyone has ever lived in a small community, they would realize how scary it would be if that happened.
All Canadians know we need firefighters. I am not sure how many understand the commitment and health realities they face because of their service. We must all do better.
I want to thank all the fire stations in my riding: Cortes Island, Powell River, Malaspina, Savary Island, Northside, Tal'amin, Alert Bay, Campbell River, Comox, Gillies Bay, Gold River, Port Alice, Port Hardy, Port McNeill, Quadra Island, Sayward, Sointula, Tahsis and Zeballos.
I see them working hard in their communities, their intense engagement on social media and all that they do to keep us safe. I hope all members in this place will do better for firefighters.
1432 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Jun/20/22 2:15:28 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, Alberta Billy was an influential leader and elder from the Laich-Kwil-Tach speaking people.
Her passing fills me with a deep sadness, and it will have a profound impact on our riding. The gentleness of her spirit called everyone around her to be their very best self. She was a significant leader who educated Canadians about the deep and painful impacts of residential school. In the eighties, with friends Thelma Davis and Stan McKay, she worked years to inspire the United Church of Canada to take ownership of the part it played, which it did, becoming the first religious institution to apologize to indigenous peoples.
She did not stop there. She worked with Kathi and Meredith to educate people on the impacts of residential schools with an experiential training through The Village workshop series. She would say to me, “We do it because we must.” Her words give me strength in challenging times. The world a much sadder place without Alberta. I am so honoured to have known and loved her. I wish her husband, Daniel, and her family much love in this profound time of grief.
192 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Madam Speaker, I am very happy to be here today to speak on this really important issue, especially for the many seniors across our country who are relying on us to get this piece of legislation passed.
I will be sharing my time with the amazing member for Nunavut, who has some very important things to share with us about the region she represents and how unique those experiences are for seniors.
I also want to take this opportunity to recognize that over 50 more children's bodies have been found outside of a residential institution. All of us sit in this place, a place that created all of the framework for what happened and continues to happen to indigenous communities, and I hope we are all listening. For every single child we hear about and for every community that is talking about what happened and are sharing these stories, I hope we are all listening and carrying those stories and communities with us. I would like to express my sincerest condolences to those communities and let them know I will be thinking of them during this very painful time. I continue to think of all the communities that are in the process of still looking for children who have been lost and are still waiting for them to be recovered, and of course I recognize all of those who have been found.
We are here tonight to talk about seniors and the fact the government made a colossal mistake that really impacted seniors profoundly. Working seniors did what every other Canadian did. They lost their jobs because of the pandemic and they applied for pandemic benefits to help tide them over during this very difficult time.
As we have these discussions, I hope we recognize seniors across this country, the most vulnerable of them, the ones who are receiving the guaranteed income supplement, are hitting a crisis point. Even with this payment that I am very grateful to see happen, it is far too late. July of last year was when these seniors lost their GIS, some partially and some completely. During that time, they have not only lost this amount of money but lost the provincial benefits that are automatically given to them because they qualify for the guaranteed income supplement.
I talked about those people in the House of Commons repeatedly, because it is important all of us as legislators understand the impacts we have when we make decisions, the impacts the government creates when it makes decisions without really looking at the ramifications, especially for those of us who are challenged the most.
Even with this money coming sooner than we expected and opening up stores so Service Canada can work with members to identify the seniors who are the most vulnerable and get them the money even sooner, we know they have lost so much during that time. I think of the many seniors who lost their homes. They lost the places where they lived and are now put in a bad situation. We all know in this place, because we are hearing in all our communities and constituencies, that the cost of living is going up dramatically. The cost of housing is one of the most profoundly expensive costs we have.
When we look at some of these low-income seniors, they lost their housing when they lost their GIS. They lost the stable housing they could afford and are now living in vehicles or in someone's basement. They are living an experience they hoped they would never have to. Something I will also think about when I remember this time is how many seniors said they never thought they would be in this position in their eighties.
Here they are now and they are finally getting a one-time payment. They are going to be retroactively paid, and then into the future we are being promised by the government that there will be no more cutbacks, that they will return to their normal GIS and that things should continue. However, they have already lost so much, and now they are having to pay a lot higher rates for their rent. In some cases, they have lost their health because they have not been able to afford their medication.
I do not know about the other members in the House, but as the senior spokesperson for the NDP, I am hearing not only from my constituency but from seniors across Canada who are writing to ask if they will be punished again in the next tax season. They are asking me if this is really going to be over and if I can promise them this is going to be over.
I really hope that the minister thinks about that as this rolls out and that we make sure that seniors across this country are educated so they know that things should get better. More than anything I hope that of course this place will make sure that this does not happen again.
It does really outline something that I believe this place has to take more consideration of and that is the growing poverty across our country. Persons living with disabilities and seniors are some of the poorest people across our country. We need to look into that and figure out how we can do much better. All of us have been shaken by this. When we recognize that, for single seniors, the GIS tops them up to just over $19,000 a year and if they are in a partnership just over $25,000 a year, most of us cannot imagine, especially with the cost of everything increasing, living on that low income.
I hope and have encouraged the minister to start talking meaningfully about a guaranteed basic livable income. We need to have this conversation. As we see the world changing and see automation increasing, we need to see the bar of dignity extended and not dismissed as it has been.
We also have to have big conversations about how long seniors are working, some by choice and some because they do not have a choice, and make sure that the tax system works for them. We know a lot of seniors are working into their mid-seventies and when they hit a certain point in their seventies, they are no longer able to pay into the Canadian pension plan. That can be a big deterrent for people who have good health and want to keep working.
I also want to talk about the guaranteed income supplement and one of the big faults that it has. Every year between 20,000 to 30,000 seniors in July lose their guaranteed income supplement. They lose it in part because they filed their taxes a little too late, because somebody they loved was ill, because they themselves were ill, and sometimes because they are having an onset of dementia. There are multiple reasons that happens.
I have asked the minister to consider a bill I presented that would look at making sure that every senior who received the guaranteed income supplement had a one-year amnesty. If they got their taxes in a little late, they would not be worried about being able to pay their rent in July.
When I was first elected, I had a call from a senior who was 84 years old, telling me that she got her taxes in a little late because she was sick with the flu during tax time. She had lost her GIS and did not know when it was coming and was going to be evicted from her apartment. I do not think anyone in the House wants to see an 84-year-old evicted simply because she was ill.
My bill would look at creating a space for people to be secure in their income, for those like this amazing senior who was so brave to reach out. For seniors to have to humble themselves, who have worked hard their whole lives, the vast majority of seniors receiving GIS are single women or the working poor. That is who they are. They have worked hard all of their lives. They do not want to ask for handouts. They want to look after themselves, so this has been really hard. We were able to work with the senior, her landlord and with the CRA to make sure that she got her money quickly and assured the landlord she would be able to pay her rent, if a little late.
I hope as we go through this experience all of us remember it is our job here as legislators to make sure that the most vulnerable in our country are cared for. When we look at the processes that we are putting into place, we need to think first of those who need us to think of them and not think of those who have so much that they can fill in those gaps when they need to.
It has been said to me many times that we know who we are by how the people who are the most vulnerable in our communities are doing. Canada must do better. We have seen this example for seniors. Let us make sure that we no longer punish the poor for simply doing the hardest work they can to look after themselves.
1567 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- menumenu
- notificationsnotifications
- home
- mailmail
- searchsearch
