House of Commons Hansard #171 of the 41st Parliament, 2nd Session. (The original version is on Parliament's site.) The word of the day was rcmp.

Topics

Parliamentary Precinct SecurityGovernment Orders

1:10 p.m.

Conservative

The Acting Speaker Conservative Barry Devolin

Order.

The hon. member for Saanich—Gulf Islands.

Parliamentary Precinct SecurityGovernment Orders

1:10 p.m.

Green

Elizabeth May Green Saanich—Gulf Islands, BC

Mr. Speaker, can I please say to our dear friends on the other side, do not take personal offence.

The motion from the Conservative administration clearly demotes the Hill security people. There is no imputing the personal views of any of the other members in this. It is as plain as day. It actually says that their employment will be looked after, as if they might be shuffled to other duties.

We are not reading too much into this in recognizing that this is demoting the people who put themselves directly in harm's way. I will never criticize the RCMP as an institution, and I know I am not a security expert, but I do know that a lot of RCMP cars sat outside while a gunman ran by. The RCMP did a better job stopping the Leader of the Opposition when he ran a stop sign.

Parliamentary Precinct SecurityGovernment Orders

1:15 p.m.

NDP

Peter Julian NDP Burnaby—New Westminster, BC

Mr. Speaker, I agree with the member for Saanich—Gulf Islands. This is a very clear demotion.

For the Conservatives who say it is not, that they object and consider it unfair, they should read the motion as presented, a motion which the Prime Minister is trying to force through the House today.

The government House leader has said the government will impose closure because it does not want a debate on this. I know there are some Canadians who are very interested in this. They want access to Parliament Hill. They want to ensure we preserve our rights and freedoms.

Those Canadians who are listening to us today should contact their Conservative members of Parliament to tell them that this is very poor treatment of courageous men and women who deserve better. They should also tell them they want to preserve the kind of checks and balances we have always had in our system, the separation of power, as well as access to the front lawn of Canada.

Canadians phoning Conservative MPs in the next week will make a difference. Hopefully some Conservatives will break their whip and vote for Canadian democracy.

Parliamentary Precinct SecurityGovernment Orders

February 6th, 2015 / 1:15 p.m.

Conservative

Dave MacKenzie Conservative Oxford, ON

Mr. Speaker, I have listened to the member speak all day long. Most of it is half truths at best. There has been no word at all about not allowing Canadians on the front lawn. In fact, it is exactly the opposite.

Why he would try to turn this thing around into something it is not defies logic. Why he would not think it is important that we have security all operating in one silo, as opposed to three, again defies logic.

It is not about replacing our current security people, who have the utmost respect of everybody in the House. It is to bring them under one umbrella. I do not know why he would be opposed to that. Maybe he has some reason that nobody else can understand.

Could he try to explain it?

Parliamentary Precinct SecurityGovernment Orders

1:15 p.m.

NDP

Peter Julian NDP Burnaby—New Westminster, BC

Mr. Speaker, I certainly will explain it. First, I will quote a Conservative senator who is driving part of this process through with the Prime Minister's Office. In an article in The Globe and Mail, he said:

After calling on the RCMP to take overall responsibility for security on the Hill, the next step will be designing a system by which all visitors go through a new security perimeter...

That may not be in the Prime Minister's Office notes that have been distributed to Conservative MPs, but that is obviously what the next step will be. This came out before the motion. Now we are finding out that they have a next step.

We have objections and strong concerns raised by our security personnel. We have strong operational concerns raised by the fact that the RCMP has said that it is not ready for this.

It defies logic that the Conservatives would try to ram this botched motion through just because the Prime Minister sees a strategic opportunity after October 22, 2014, to impose his personal will on Parliament.

Parliamentary Precinct SecurityGovernment Orders

1:15 p.m.

NDP

Wayne Marston NDP Hamilton East—Stoney Creek, ON

Mr. Speaker, I thank my friends across the way who are taking the time to listen to this debate. There is not a full House on a Friday, and it is a difficult time for a debate—

Parliamentary Precinct SecurityGovernment Orders

1:15 p.m.

Conservative

James Bezan Conservative Selkirk—Interlake, MB

What exactly is the relevance?

Parliamentary Precinct SecurityGovernment Orders

1:15 p.m.

NDP

Wayne Marston NDP Hamilton East—Stoney Creek, ON

Mr. Speaker, I have not finished, so the member does not know whether I am relevant or not.

The reality of the situation we find ourselves in is that there is agreement here. There is agreement with the report of the Auditor General, which said that there had to be changes made in our security. We agree we need unification in the control of our forces.

We act as part of NATO, where we go in with forces from other countries and we work well together. That does not mean we have to change the line of accountability from the Speaker's office.

This is unconstitutional. Members should spend some time thinking about that part. We are in agreement with most of the changes the Conservatives are talking about, but we are not in agreement with taking the line of responsibility away from the Speaker.

Parliamentary Precinct SecurityGovernment Orders

1:15 p.m.

NDP

Peter Julian NDP Burnaby—New Westminster, BC

Mr. Speaker, I will just cite, for the final time, for members the association representing our parliamentary security officers. Those brave men and women who protect us say that it is:

—an indefensible and dangerous interference of government into...the legislative function, as well as a solid breach into one of the foundational pillars of our democratic system: the principle of separation of powers.

That is not me speaking. It is the brave men and women who protect us every day. I would ask members to please listen to them.

Parliamentary Precinct SecurityGovernment Orders

1:20 p.m.

Kamloops—Thompson—Cariboo B.C.

Conservative

Cathy McLeod ConservativeParliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Labour and for Western Economic Diversification

Mr. Speaker, I am not sure if the word is “pleased”, but I am really happy to have the opportunity to join this debate. It is clearly an important and very passionate debate about the integration of the forces on Parliament Hill for the protection of all parliamentarians and Canadians on the Hill.

As I listen to some of the motives that get impugned, I would say that there is not a person in the House who does not have the utmost respect for the work that our security forces do. We are profoundly grateful for the support they provided to us on October 22, and indeed every day.

While listening to the debate, I have been trying to think of an analogy. As I have mentioned a few times in the past, I come from a health care background. I was part of some of the change management work that had to be done. I will give an example.

I went into an organization that was treating people with significant chronic diseases. In taking care of patients, they would have dietitians, physiotherapists, physicians, and nurses all providing excellent care. These people were all providing excellent care in their field of expertise, but in isolation from what everyone else was doing. Just as it was here, that isolation was identified as not being in people's best interests. Accordingly, I think we are all on the same page here in agreeing on the significant need for integration and the importance of that.

It was a really tough job to get people together, even sharing records, because there were independent practitioners, health authorities, and small business folks. How would we get these folks to work in the best interests of the patient and start to share the support and services together? We went through that process and then we had to decide who would be the case manager.

When we were looking at that, it was not a matter of who provided the best service or who had the best training. Everyone was recognized for their important expertise in roles they brought to the table. We picked as case managers the people who were more integrated with the outside world, the community as a whole. The best connector was the person who was in the best position to coordinate the work of all the very excellent medical practitioners.

I do not see that as unlike what we are doing here. Who is the connector who will be able to connect the security to the wider whole? During this debate, I noticed there were a number of us in the House who are still a little jumpy. There was a huge unidentified noise on the roof of the building and a number of people all of a sudden jumped. What was that?

Maybe some other people are not aware, but four days before the incident on Parliament Hill on October 22, my staff member was in the office and there was a plane going back and forth over the parliamentary precinct. She was very agitated. Obviously the plane was in a no-fly zone. She did not know what it was going to do. She phoned the Hill security, but how are we best to connect to that greater whole? That is what this about.

This is about the security of Canadians and the security of parliamentarians. I have to say that the opposition members are showing a bit of a lack of faith in the Speakers of these honourable places. This is clearly like the situation in every province, where they determine whether or not they want to have a provincial police force or how they want to structure the police forces within their province and communities. These become negotiated agreements that are very reflective of the needs of their communities and what they are doing.

If we go back to the motion, with respect to the terrorist attack of October 22, 2014, it recognizes:

...the necessity of fully integrated security throughout the Parliamentary precinct and the grounds of Parliament Hill, as recommended by the Auditor General in his 2012 report and as exists in other peer legislatures; and call on the Speaker, in coordination with his counterpart in the Senate, to invite, without delay, the Royal Canadian Mounted Police to lead operational security throughout the Parliamentary precinct and the grounds of Parliament Hill...

The following point is important. Again, this is something that opposition members are putting out in terms of their privileges and immunities. It reads:

...while respecting the privileges, immunities and powers of the respective Houses, and ensuring the continued employment of our existing and respected Parliamentary Security staff.

I think opposition members are presuming a lot of things that are not accurate. The motion is very clear about respecting privileges and immunities. What we are talking about is the need for greater connectivity within the whole.

When I first became a parliamentarian, I remember being very surprised that the Senate security was very different from the House of Commons. Then I learned about the structure. I remember many people saying that it did not make sense and that it was probably in our best interests to have a coordinated service, but it seemed as though it was a challenge to make those changes. I suppose October 22 spearheaded these changes, but they are changes that I think people have identified for a long time as needing to come forward.

The RCMP has connectivity with the broader intelligence that is out there. There is connectivity to resources. Again, this is not about the excellent work that our staff does; it is about the broader resources that are available in terms of extensive experience in security assessments, information sharing, and evolving threats. They have to deal with threats in many other areas.

I think we are going to have a difficult change. There is no question that it is going to be a challenge, but I think it is an important change. I believe that 10 years from now we are going to be saying that our Speakers have done a good job, our parliamentary security is in a good position, and we made sure that we have the protection and support we need.

We have to recognize that our security staff serve a variety of important functions, and we fully expect that will continue under the integrated security unit. All decisions related to the integrated security unit will ensure continuous employment and will be managed with full transparency.

I will go back to my original example of a patient who is struggling with many different issues and is surrounded by caregivers. There may be family members, dietitians, nutritionists, and physicians who have to be integrated, number one, but they will also need to realize who is in the best position and who can connect to the wider whole. In this case, I think we are trying to do what is best for the security of the personnel on the Hill—

Parliamentary Precinct SecurityGovernment Orders

1:25 p.m.

Conservative

The Acting Speaker Conservative Barry Devolin

Order. I need to interrupt the parliamentary secretary at this point in time, as the time for government orders has expired. The parliamentary secretary will have 11 minutes remaining when this matter returns before the House.

It being 1:30 p.m., the House will now proceed to the consideration of private members' business as listed on today's order paper.

The House proceeded to the consideration of Bill C-608, An Act respecting a National Day of the Midwife, as reported (without amendment) from the committee.

National Day of the Midwife ActPrivate Members' Business

1:25 p.m.

Conservative

The Acting Speaker Conservative Barry Devolin

There being only one motion at report stage, the House will now proceed without debate to the putting of the question on the motion to concur in the bill at report stage.

National Day of the Midwife ActPrivate Members' Business

1:30 p.m.

NDP

Rosane Doré Lefebvre NDP Alfred-Pellan, QC

moved that the bill be concurred in.

National Day of the Midwife ActPrivate Members' Business

1:30 p.m.

Conservative

The Acting Speaker Conservative Barry Devolin

The vote is on the motion. Is it the pleasure of the House to adopt the motion?

National Day of the Midwife ActPrivate Members' Business

1:30 p.m.

Some hon. members

Agreed.

National Day of the Midwife ActPrivate Members' Business

1:30 p.m.

Conservative

The Acting Speaker Conservative Barry Devolin

(Motion agreed to)

National Day of the Midwife ActPrivate Members' Business

1:30 p.m.

Conservative

The Acting Speaker Conservative Barry Devolin

When shall the bill be read the third time? By leave, now?

National Day of the Midwife ActPrivate Members' Business

1:30 p.m.

Some hon. members

Agreed.

National Day of the Midwife ActPrivate Members' Business

1:30 p.m.

NDP

Rosane Doré Lefebvre NDP Alfred-Pellan, QC

moved that the bill be now read the third time and passed.

Mr. Speaker, I have the honour to be in the House today to debate my Bill C-608, the National Day of the Midwife Act.

This has been quite the saga. I am extremely proud that all parties in the House voted unanimously at second reading to send the bill to committee. That was good teamwork, and it is wonderful to see that our Parliament can function and that we can work together on great bills such as the one to establish a national day of the midwife.

First of all, I must thank my colleague from Parkdale—High Park, because in the beginning, she was the one who decided to introduce this bill in the House of Commons. She brought forward the first version and began the debate with members of other parties in the House—Conservatives, Liberals and independents—and with experts and the people directly affected, the midwifery associations. I must commend the work done by my colleague from Parkdale—High Park, because she does not take much credit for it. However, because of her groundwork, today we are talking about a national day of the midwife.

I would like to provide a bit of background, because it shows that MPs are very good at doing the groundwork, representing their constituents and bringing their ideas to Parliament. When my colleague was going door to door, she met a woman belonging to a midwifery association who told her about the important work midwives do. She told the member for Parkdale—High Park about their intentions and the fact that midwifery was not yet recognized in every Canadian province and territory, but that they were working on it.

Canadian universities have some of the best midwifery training programs in the world. We can also be proud of that. There are currently 1,300 midwives in Canada, and only 2% to 5% of the population has access to their services. It is thus very difficult and the demand is growing. However, every year, more and more midwives are entering the workforce, and we can only be very proud.

My colleague saw all that potential. She was determined that we should recognize the work of midwives and help them further themselves. She decided to work with people in her riding and across the country to establish a national day of the midwife. I am extremely proud to take up the torch and ensure that this bill is passed as soon as possible. However, I would be remiss if I did not acknowledge her tremendous work on the ground.

As I said, all the parties in the House voted in favour of this bill. We had the chance to go to committee. I presented my bill to the hon. members of the Standing Committee on Health, where it was very well received. They also agreed to hear from witnesses directly affected by this bill. I had the opportunity to appear with the Canadian Association of Midwives and the National Aboriginal Council of Midwives, which also does extraordinary work.

I want to take few minutes to talk about the NACM, because this bill affects them a great deal. Access to midwifery services is particularly crucial in rural and remote communities, including among first nations.

Currently, when a women living on reserve becomes pregnant, the delivery process is not necessarily the same as in large urban centres. Here, the choice is much simpler. We can choose to be seen by a doctor, we can go to the hospital and be accompanied by a doula, or we can give birth at home or at a birthing centre with a midwife. We have a lot of options. Access to some of these options is still limited, but we have them.

For first nations, it is much more complicated.

A few weeks before giving birth, a pregnant woman has to be airlifted to a large urban centre. She is alone. She does not have her family, her spouse or her children with her. She is far away from her family during those final critical weeks. It is not only extremely sad, but downright terrible that these sorts of things are happening in a country as big and as rich as ours.

A good example that I was given was to imagine a woman who is giving birth to her first child. Like my colleague from Beauharnois—Salaberry and all of the other members who are parents, I know that you do not really know what to expect when you are expecting your first child. It can be extremely stressful. You ask yourself a thousand questions. You read books, watch films and talk to people you know to find out how it is going to go. The last weeks are extremely critical, as are the first few days after the delivery.

Women who are sent to large urban centres are alone. They do not have their family, friends, grandmother, mother or aunt to talk to and consult to find out if what is happening is normal. When they give birth, they are isolated in a large urban centre where they do not know anyone. They are not with their spouse.

The days following delivery can be very difficult. For example, a woman who wants to breastfeed may have breastfeeding problems or questions about breastfeeding in general. She cannot be with her own mother who could have shared her own experience. That is very difficult on these women. They return to their communities, where there is no connection to the birth or to what happened. It is extremely difficult for the family, the woman and the community in general.

We are trying to reintegrate the birthing process into communities, because about 95% of pregnancies are considered normal. There is therefore no need to send women who are preparing to give birth to major urban centres. They can give birth in their community with midwives. This issue is slowly being addressed, based on the province or area where the community is located. However, there is still a long way to go.

I am very pleased to see that all of Parliament has decided that it is very important to acknowledge the incredible work that midwives do. Whether we are talking about midwives in first nations communities or midwives in general all across the country, it is extremely important to acknowledge the work that they do.

Today I simply wanted to rise in the House to thank my colleagues for the good work they are doing and for their goodwill on this bill. I noticed that there was a significant interest in continuing the debate on funding for midwives and in perhaps reviewing the birthing process for women from rural and remote communities.

I saw that all parties in the House showed openness on this issue, and I am extremely proud. I hope that this will continue. If my colleagues once again vote in favour of this bill at third reading, the next step will be the Senate. That will be a whole other experience. For now, I would like to thank Parliament. Why not take this bill as an excellent example of how the opposition and the government can work side by side, and why not continue in this direction for future bills?

National Day of the Midwife ActPrivate Members' Business

1:40 p.m.

Green

Elizabeth May Green Saanich—Gulf Islands, BC

Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank my colleague very much, because this bill is very important. Like my colleague, I had a midwife when I gave birth to my daughter. It is such a wonderful experience. I was lucky to be able to do so. This bill is very important for women and as a way of showing respect for this profession. I simply wanted to say that she has my support for this bill, and I hope everyone in the House will support this important bill.

National Day of the Midwife ActPrivate Members' Business

1:40 p.m.

NDP

Rosane Doré Lefebvre NDP Alfred-Pellan, QC

Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague from Saanich—Gulf Islands for supporting Bill C-608.

Many of my colleagues in the House have stopped me here in the House, in the hallways or even at the Standing Committee on Health to tell me about their experiences during a birth with a midwife. It is so nice to be able to share that experience together, so that we can better understand midwifery and what that profession entails, and see that it is an option. People do not have to adopt the traditional model. I am paraphrasing here because I think the hospital model is considered to be traditional. It is just great to see how those birthing experiences can vary from one person to another and that they are often wonderful experiences.

I thank my colleague from Saanich—Gulf Islands. She is right: we need to reclaim the birthing experience.

National Day of the Midwife ActPrivate Members' Business

1:40 p.m.

Essex Ontario

Conservative

Jeff Watson ConservativeParliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Transport

Mr. Speaker, I commend the member for this motion.

I am a father of six children, five biological children. My wife was proud to deliver five children with midwives present. In fact, for our fourth child, because we were moving between Windsor to Victoria and then on to Ottawa, all in the span of a week, we had midwives in Windsor, on Salt Spring Island, and in Ottawa, where our son was ultimately born during that transition, all with expert care.

I want to commend the member for pointing out, first, that midwives are professionals. They are trained professionals. They have been delivering woman-centred care for centuries, for millenniums, long before there were ever health care systems, and it is about time that they had recognition.

I want to signal to the member that I will be supporting the bill, and I commend her for it.

National Day of the Midwife ActPrivate Members' Business

1:40 p.m.

NDP

Rosane Doré Lefebvre NDP Alfred-Pellan, QC

Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank my colleague opposite for sharing his experience with us. It is very touching to hear the experiences that some of my colleagues have had with midwives.

I completely agree with the member. It is fitting that we recognize the incredible work done by midwives by establishing the national day of the midwife here in Canada, as I believe all of us in the House want to do, and that we also recognize that these women have an incredible knowledge of birthing. Midwives go through a lengthy university training process and have incredible experience in the health field. They are recognized around the world for their services. They often give speeches in other countries, and they even go to other countries to teach all the skills they have acquired here.

We are very fortunate in Canada to have such experienced health care professionals who have such a diverse university education. I thank them for that.

National Day of the Midwife ActPrivate Members' Business

1:40 p.m.

Conservative

David Wilks Conservative Kootenay—Columbia, BC

Mr. Speaker, I congratulate the member opposite on this bill. When she came to the health committee with the witnesses, they did a fabulous job. It was very honourable of her to get to this point, and I am looking forward to it going to the Senate.

I have a significant speech I prepared, but I am going to stray from it a bit and highlight some of the points on midwifery.

In August 2013, the Cochrane review, which involved 16,242 women in models of care, including where midwives provided care through pregnancy, during labour, and after birth, and which has one of the highest standards of evidence, confirmed the safety and efficacy of midwifery-led care. It is very important to understand that there is a lot of data on this in Canada, and we are starting to get a lot better at what we do.

Certainly midwives save lives, some 300,000 women each year and 10 times as many infants. That is important to understand too. As midwifery evolves and we get far better at it, we are going to be able to save millions of lives around the world. It is thanks to members opposite and others who have brought this to light that we will be able to do much more in years to come.

According to the Canadian Association of Midwives, a little over 1,300 midwives attend approximately 10% of births in Canada. While these numbers may seem small, it represents tremendous growth.

The practice of midwifery is relatively new in Canada, with the first midwives regulated to practice in 1994. We are only 20 years out since it started. As of 2014, midwives are recognized to practice in eight out of 10 provinces and in two of three territories. We still have a little work to do, but I am sure with the collective work in the House, as well as with the members opposite, we can make that 10 out of 10 and three out of three.

While the government recognizes that primary responsibility for the provision and delivery of health care services in Canada rests with the provinces and territories, we remain committed to a strong, publicly funded, universally accessible health care system for all of Canada.

An evaluation of the midwifery approach to maternal health care in Ontario noted that midwives have lower rates of invasive procedures, fewer re-admissions to hospital, and shorter hospital stays. This translates into a cost saving of $800 per midwifery-attended hospital birth and a saving of $1,800 for home births when compared with family physician care for women with low-risk pregnancies.

Federal recognition of midwives will help to increase the value of this profession in providing maternal care services to women and their families as well as the potential role of midwives in promoting a high-quality and sustainable health care system.

Maternal, newborn, and child health care remains Canada's top international development priority, and we are committed to working with Canadian and international partners toward the goal of ending the preventable deaths of mothers, newborns, and children under the age of five.

In June 2010, under the Right Honourable Prime Minister's leadership, the G8 launched the Muskoka initiative on maternal, newborn and child health, which aims to save the lives of mothers, newborns, and children. As part of this initiative, Canada committed $2.85 billion between 2010 and 2015 to help women and children in the world's poorest countries.

Midwifery training and service provision is also a key component of our government's support through the G8 Muskoka initiative. Thanks in large part to the Muskoka initiative and subsequent global action, maternal mortality rates are declining, and millions more children are celebrating their fifth birthdays. Access to health care and nutrition is up, and millions of lives continue to be saved each year. This important work will continue.

In May 2014, the right hon. Prime Minister hosted the Saving Every Woman, Every Child: Within Arms's Reach summit. At that summit, Canada committed $3.5 billion for the period of 2015 to 2020 and renewed global momentum to advance maternal, newborn, and child health as a global priority beyond 2015.

Canada will continue to work with our country's partners to advance progress on international maternal health by investing in improved service delivery at the local level, training more health workers, increasing access to adequately equip local health facilities, and expanding access to services.

Since 1991, the International Day of the Midwife on May 5 has been recognized by organizations, such as the United Nations and the World Health Organization, to raise awareness of the importance of the role midwives play and the careful care they provide. A national day of the midwife would help to increase awareness of the value of the profession in providing maternal care services to women and their families, both domestically and internationally.

Therefore, I support Bill C-608, which seeks to designate May 5 of each and every year as the national day of the midwife. I invite my hon. colleagues to do the same.