Randall Garrison

[Canada-United States-Mexico Agreement Implementation Act, March 10th, 2020]

Madam Speaker, the agreement that the Conservatives will be supporting takes out the investor-state suing provisions in the current trade agreement with the United States. Since the Conservatives are supporting that, I would be interested in the hon. member's opinion on the agreement the Conservative government signed with China, the FIPA agreement. Can we be assured that if Huawei is denied participation in the 5G network, there will not be financial repercussions for the United States under that agreement, which the previous Conservative government negotiated?

[Business of Supply, February 28th, 2020]

Madam Speaker, I listened with great interest to the member for Manicouagan's speech. She made a tremendously good argument for a better way of proceeding in this Parliament.

The member joined us here in 2015. I wonder whether she shares my view that the basic problem here is that the Liberal government and caucus have failed to understand what it means to work together with other people in a minority Parliament. The Liberals still seem to be acting as if they had a majority. They do not seem to recognize the results of the last election, and that necessity at a very basic level to work with others in this House.

[Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship, February 28th, 2020]

Madam Speaker, since 2015, New Democrats have been pressing the Liberal government to create a path to safety in Canada for those whose lives are at risk because of their sexual orientation or gender identity (SOGI). So far, all we have is a pilot program for just 50 SOGI refugees, just 50, when Rainbow Refugee organizations in Canada receive more than 1,000 requests for urgent assistance each month.

Given the rising tide of violence against SOGI communities, will the government now recognize the grave threat to SOGI refugees and quickly implement a comprehensive and substantial program for those fleeing violence for who they love or who they are?

[Criminal Code, February 27th, 2020]

Madam Speaker, I want to ask the member about what I think is an unintended consequence of Bill C-14. It is the situation where people are forced to choose to go early because they are afraid of losing competence at the last minute, something the new bill addresses.

There are many examples of it across the country, I have one example that is very close to me. I have friend who wanted to see family and relatives and spend some time doing last things because she had a very serious brain tumour. She chose to go earlier because she feared losing competence.

That is an unintended consequence of the current legislation. People should be able to make that choice and have an orderly and dignified end to their lives. Does the member not see that as an unintended consequence?

[Criminal Code, February 27th, 2020]

Madam Speaker, I listened to the speech by the member for Lethbridge with great interest and I respect her very strong feelings on this issue. When she points out that the government is making changes that were not demanded by the courts, I would like to point out that there are many Canadians and Canadian families who are dealing with issues of intolerable suffering at the end of life who are asking for changes like Audrey's amendment, and they are asking for them right now.

As I mentioned earlier, because this debate is going on today, I have had someone I know quite well contact me to say they wish this bill would move quickly because it would assist them in making a choice in maintaining their control at the end of their life. They are facing intolerable suffering that cannot be alleviated.

While I agree with the member that we need more and better palliative care, we are dealing with the demand from individuals and families to make sure we avoid unnecessary suffering at the end of life.

[Criminal Code, February 27th, 2020]

Mr. Speaker, I would like to talk about something that happened just a few minutes ago. Someone I know quite well contacted me, someone who is not currently eligible for medical assistance in dying under the legislation and would probably qualify under the new provisions. This person is in intolerable pain and suffering and has reached out to many people, asking for help.

I believe the reason the government has decided to proceed with some of these changes is to meet that need and help us reduce unnecessary suffering at the end of life. This is not someone who is being pressured. This is someone whose condition is deteriorating quite rapidly and is, as I said, in enormous pain. I ask the member to think about that motivation here for us to reach out and help those people and those families who are faced with this right now, not months from now.

[Criminal Code, February 27th, 2020]

Mr. Speaker, obviously the original medical assistance in dying legislation was about limiting the amount of unnecessary suffering when people are facing end-of-life issues, both for the individual and for the families.

One part of the legislation that has been brought forward has been referred to as “Audrey's amendment”, named after Audrey Parker, a woman in Nova Scotia, who felt forced to choose an earlier death than she would have liked and ended up missing a last Christmas with her family because she felt she might lose competence and not be able to give consent at the end.

The bill that has come forward provides that those who have been assessed and approved can give instruction to a doctor so that if they lose competence before their wishes are carried out, they can receive assistance and not have to make the ugly choice to go sooner than they would like. Does the member support that provision?

[Health, February 26th, 2020]

Mr. Speaker, well over a year ago, the Prime Minister committed in this House to work with us to reach the UN targets that would lead to the eradication of HIV. Instead, new infections are up 11%, and 19% in Saskatchewan.

Nothing has been done to make HIV testing and treatment more available, not for racialized and marginalized Canadians, not for young gay men, and especially not in indigenous communities where the rate of new infections continues to climb.

Why has the Prime Minister failed to get the things done that we need to eradicate HIV in this country?

[Employment Equity Act, February 25th, 2020]

moved for leave to introduce Bill C-227, An Act to amend the Employment Equity Act.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to introduce a private member's bill entitled “an act to amend the Employment Equity Act”.

The Employment Equity Act was designed to ensure that we achieve equality in employment in the federal public service and for large employers in the private sector that come under federal jurisdiction. The fact is that the workforces in these areas still fail to represent the diversity of the Canadian population.

As it stands, the Employment Equity Act applies to only four groups: women, aboriginal people, persons with disabilities and visible minorities. Members of my community, lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender Canadians, are left out of the act. This private member's bill would make sure we are counted in.

Once again, I would like to thank the Public Service Alliance of Canada for its strong advocacy on this issue, and in particular Paul Jones of the Union of National Defence Employees in my riding.

We know that so many Canadians remain under-represented in all levels of employment, and that transgender Canadians suffer particularly high levels of unemployment and underemployment. Adding transgender Canadians to the Employment Equity Act would force employers to address this fact and come up with concrete plans to remove the barriers to equal employment for all.

(Motions deemed adopted, bill read the first time and printed)

[Royal Canadian Mounted Police Act, February 7th, 2020]

Mr. Speaker, it is nice to see you in the chair, and I will compliment the job you have done so far as long as you do not cut me off.

My question for the hon. member goes to the fact that all parties here are aware of the importance of the bill. It has been a long time coming, as I pointed out several times. I first raised this issue more than six years ago in the House.

Once these measures are implemented, I am concerned that review bodies need to have adequate resources so that when complaints are filed, they can be dealt with in an expeditious manner and not be left hanging over the heads of Canada Border Services officers, who by and large do an excellent job for us each and every day.

I am wondering whether the member shares my concern, and if so, whether he will make it known in his caucus that when the bill does pass, we have to make sure that the review agency is adequately resourced.