I did allude in my statement that kinship caregivers and customary caregivers should be included in this legislation. It's important. It recognizes the role that grandparents and aunts and uncles play as kin.

It's very important that we have customary caregivers included in this legislation for the role that they play. We have worked very closely with some customary caregivers who have taken over care of nieces and nephews, and they haven't taken any leave. Many weren't even aware that leave was available to them. These things are really important. They're doing such important work. They're allowing a child to not only stay in their community but to keep their culture and their language. It's very important work, and it needs to be recognized.

5:25 p.m.

Liberal

Tony Van Bynen Liberal Newmarket—Aurora, ON

Shelley, would you like to add to that?

5:25 p.m.

Instructional Assistant, As an Individual

Shelley Rottenberg

I don't have any other amendments or edits that I can think of at the moment. I would agree with everything Cathy said about being as inclusive as possible of all types of guardians and carers.

5:25 p.m.

Liberal

Tony Van Bynen Liberal Newmarket—Aurora, ON

This comes back to the issue of our adding the 15 weeks as a matter of equality. My concern is a matter of equity. Would an equity consideration be something we should give further consideration to, perhaps at future reviews?

Those are all of my questions.

5:25 p.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Bobby Morrissey

Thank you, Mr. Van Bynen.

Ms. Chabot, you have the floor for two and a half minutes.

5:25 p.m.

Bloc

Louise Chabot Bloc Thérèse-De Blainville, QC

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

My last question is an important one, so I'm going to put it to both witnesses.

First, I'd like to remind you that the bill seeks to amend the Employment Insurance Act to ensure equity with respect to maternity leave. It proposes to add 15 weeks to the current 35 weeks of benefits, for a total of 50 weeks. This objective seems very important to us: It's a matter of equity between adoptive parents and those who already have maternity leave. The other changes are consequential amendments to the Canada Labour Code.

You do understand that this does not apply to caregivers, but only to adoptive mothers. You mentioned caregivers, but that's not what this bill is about. It's intended to provide adoptive mothers with leave for attachment purposes. In that context, would you make any amendments to the bill?

Ms. Murphy, do you want to respond?

5:25 p.m.

Chairperson and adoptive parent, Child and Youth Permanency Council of Canada

Cathy Murphy

We would like to see it called what it is, which is a 15-week “attachment leave”. Ideally, customary caregivers and kinship caregivers would be included in this.

Those are the only changes that we would suggest.

5:30 p.m.

Instructional Assistant, As an Individual

Shelley Rottenberg

Yes, I would agree with what Cathy said.

5:30 p.m.

Bloc

Louise Chabot Bloc Thérèse-De Blainville, QC

Thank you.

To do that, what changes would have to be made to the current legislation?

5:30 p.m.

Chairperson and adoptive parent, Child and Youth Permanency Council of Canada

Cathy Murphy

Shelley, do you want to take that?

5:30 p.m.

Instructional Assistant, As an Individual

Shelley Rottenberg

I'm not sure if I'd know about the other laws that might be impacted or might need to be changed as much. If it would benefit families, children or parents, then I think that should definitely be considered—to make changes that would push us forward in the direction of being able to support and help parents with parenting and meeting children's needs.

5:30 p.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Bobby Morrissey

Thank you, Ms. Chabot.

Mr. Angus, you have two and a half minutes, please.

5:30 p.m.

NDP

Charlie Angus NDP Timmins—James Bay, ON

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Ms. Murphy, I'm very pleased and interested in your statement on the need for the amendment on kinship and customary care. We know that Bill C-92 has devolved the role for establishing child welfare codes to first nations and Inuit communities. It is so important.

In communities I represent, we have the kokums, the grandmothers, who are raising children. We have cousins and neighbours who are raising children. They are raising them with love, but they are often never recognized. We fight like hell to get them the child tax benefit because we have to prove it again and again. These are very natural ways that children are being brought into safe environments when they are in unsafe environments, when they are at risk or when the parents are not in a position to look after the children. In one of the communities I was in, they said, “We aren't going to take the children out of the homes; we're going to take the parents out of the homes. The children should have safe homes. If the parents are the ones causing problems, we'll take them out, and we'll look after the children in their home.”

From your work, what you've seen and your experience with your council, how important is it to frame language around the recognition of those family realities, for protecting and building loving homes for children?

5:30 p.m.

Chairperson and adoptive parent, Child and Youth Permanency Council of Canada

Cathy Murphy

I think it's very important. We talk about the permanency of families. Adoptive families, kinship caregivers and customary caregivers are included in that. Youth who have aged out of the system may call it “family by choice”. They may actually find support networks and connections within their communities as they become young adults, because they haven't been able to find a form of permanency.

We would like to support all of that. I think that, within indigenous communities, the customary caregiving is especially important, as you already alluded to.

5:30 p.m.

NDP

Charlie Angus NDP Timmins—James Bay, ON

Finally, it's been 11 years since Irwin Elman's report that 25 is the new 21. We have young people basically on the streets of Ottawa and other cities, out at 18 without support. There's supposed to be support. How Irwin Elman framed it is that we need, for those who are coming out of the system, an extra level of support. I know that's not the nature of this legislation, but how important do you think it is to recognize that 25 is the new 21?

5:30 p.m.

Chairperson and adoptive parent, Child and Youth Permanency Council of Canada

Cathy Murphy

It's very important. We're talking about federal legislation. Youth are aging out at different ages in every province and territory. Quebec has one of the youngest ages at which youth are aging out.

It's very significant what's happening to them. The fact that we do not have a national database in Canada that's even tracking what happens to youth after they age out is horrifying to me. That has never been established here.

5:30 p.m.

NDP

Charlie Angus NDP Timmins—James Bay, ON

Thank you.

5:30 p.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Bobby Morrissey

Thank you, Mr. Angus.

With that, we conclude the first round.

We'll need to suspend for a few moments while we do sound tests for the next witnesses.

Thank you, Ms. Rottenberg and Ms. Murphy, for your testimony here today on this important piece of legislation.

With that, committee members, we'll suspend for five minutes while we get the next panel ready.

5:40 p.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Bobby Morrissey

Committee members, the witnesses have been cleared. I will resume the meeting.

I ask committee members to take their seats while we introduce the witnesses for the last round.

Appearing in the room—and she'll do extremely well—is Cassaundra Eisner, student. We have, appearing virtually, Carolyn McLeod. Carolyn is a professor at Western University.

Welcome to the committee. We'll begin.

Cassaundra told me that she was a bit nervous. I told her to ignore everybody who was looking at her and to relax.

Cassaundra, you have the floor. You can make comments, as you choose, for up to five minutes or whatever time you like.

Please relax, and tell us what you want to.