Evidence of meeting #78 for Canadian Heritage in the 42nd Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was crime.

A recording is available from Parliament.

On the agenda

MPs speaking

Also speaking

Reuven Bulka  Congregation Machzikei Hadas, As an Individual
Michael Mostyn  Chief Executive Officer, National Office, B'nai Brith Canada
David Matas  Senior Legal Counsel, National Office, B'nai Brith Canada
Shimon Fogel  Chief Executive Officer, Centre for Israel and Jewish Affairs
Tamara Thomas  Policy Researcher and Analyst, African Canadian Legal Clinic
Sikander Hashmi  Spokesperson, Canadian Council of Imams

4:15 p.m.

Congregation Machzikei Hadas, As an Individual

Rabbi Reuven Bulka

Thank you.

I don't have what you would call a concrete answer for you, because I can't see this committee coming up with certain things that will be monitored. I think it should be in terms of encouraging and even incentivizing that encouragement to all sorts of organizations—be they religious organizations, public service organizations, philanthropical organizations—to promote inclusivity in the activities they're doing so that it becomes a visible norm throughout the entire country, not the exception, and it should be done in a way that is not impositional but rather is something that everyone will appreciate and put their minds to.

The best examples I can give you are the ones that we've been involved with at all sorts of levels, including simply doing things together, making sure in organizations.... Tonight in our synagogue, there's going to be a panel discussion involving an imam, a Catholic leader, and a rabbi on the issue of getting to know each other and asking questions of each other in a very respectful way. The more we do this type of thing, the more we build that type of culture.

4:15 p.m.

NDP

Jenny Kwan NDP Vancouver East, BC

I'd like to interject here for a minute before we go to Mr. Fogel.

There's no question that the more civil society and the community engage in this work, the better we will be as a country as a whole. There's no question. However, I am also very conscious of the fact that in certain communities, resources are an important issue, and access to resources to do this work, to facilitate this work, sometimes may not be forthcoming, even in our education system, to ensure that the teachers themselves have the proper knowledge and the proper training to do this work with their students. Sometimes that is not resourced, and the development days are not paid and covered. When that happens, you have discrepancies among school boards across the country. That's where I think we run into a major problem.

To that end, on the question of a national strategy, could we not then, as part of this committee, come forward to say to the government that we should have a national strategy resourcing communities, civil societies, and others to engage in this work?

4:15 p.m.

Congregation Machzikei Hadas, As an Individual

Rabbi Reuven Bulka

I think that would be a great idea. That recommendation would be phenomenal. It would save us a lot of work, because we have to get engaged in fundraising now to do this curriculum stuff. The idea of the government being behind it and encouraging it, and even supporting it, I say is great.

4:15 p.m.

NDP

Jenny Kwan NDP Vancouver East, BC

It would be working in collaboration with—

4:15 p.m.

Congregation Machzikei Hadas, As an Individual

October 18th, 2017 / 4:15 p.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Hedy Fry

I think we can go to Mr. Fogel now.

4:15 p.m.

Chief Executive Officer, Centre for Israel and Jewish Affairs

Shimon Fogel

I have just three very quick but important points.

The first is that I think we will succeed at nothing going forward without an expression of political will to do so. This place doesn't just have legislative authority; it also has moral authority. I recall that in the last Parliament, there was the debate on section 13 of the Canadian Human Rights Act, which ultimately was removed from the act. We had a concern that losing section 13 without strengthening the determination to use the provisions in the Criminal Code would render us worse off than had we not tinkered with it to begin with.

As a result, we reached out to Attorneys General across the country, federally and provincially, urging them to come together to undertake a commitment to exploit all the resources they had in the provisions within the Criminal Code to ensure that things didn't fall through the cracks, and as we've all had occasion to mention in the last few minutes, we've seen that's the case. Therefore, I think you do have an opportunity to send a message for a national strategy, for first ministers to come together, for police and law enforcement to achieve some degree of consensus.

The second thing that I want to mention is, I think, equally important.

4:15 p.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Hedy Fry

Excuse me, Mr. Fogel. You have about 30 seconds left to get your two other points in. We can expand later on, but we're running out of time.

4:15 p.m.

Chief Executive Officer, Centre for Israel and Jewish Affairs

Shimon Fogel

Madam Chair, you're going to lose an opportunity for a great story, which I'll fill you in on afterwards, but I'll go to the punch line. The punch line is that the other element that will determine the success of any national strategy is the ability and the willingness for law enforcement to partner with communities. If they cannot develop those direct relationships, if they cannot engender the trust of the community so that the community has confidence that law enforcement and other officials are going to take seriously the concerns that they're expressing about hate directed against their community, then we shut down the process. An important imperative is for law enforcement to reach out successfully and effectively to all threatened communities and invite them in to become full partners in the process of confronting and reversing this kind of threat.

4:15 p.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Hedy Fry

Thank you very much.

We'll now go to Julie Dabrusin for the Liberals, for seven minutes.

4:15 p.m.

Liberal

Julie Dabrusin Liberal Toronto—Danforth, ON

Thank you.

I would like to thank all the witnesses today, because you have brought to us some very tangible and very helpful recommendations, and that's really what we need, going forward, as we start to prepare our report. Thank you to all of you for that.

I would like to start with Rabbi Bulka, because I was quite taken when you were talking about Kindness Week. How do we build a culture of appreciating our differences? I think some of it was touched upon following questions from Ms. Kwan. I really want to think about it. Are there any other thoughts that you have about a government role in how we build that culture of appreciation?

I'll give you an example. I'm surrounded by two of my colleagues. One, Ms. Dzerowicz, started a Portuguese heritage month, and Mr. Levitt started Jewish heritage month, so we have two examples. Are those helpful examples? Are there other ideas you have as to what government can do?

4:15 p.m.

Congregation Machzikei Hadas, As an Individual

Rabbi Reuven Bulka

Just give me an opportunity to address what David Sweet mentioned a little while ago. When APIF was still alive—and I hope it will experience a resurrection—we actually had instituted some sort of award that was given on a yearly basis by every MP to someone in their riding who promoted intercommunity co-operation. It was a wonderful thing. It was like a bridge across Canada. Resurrecting APIF could be one of your recommendations, together with this highlighting of it.

There's another thing I would suggest. I know we focused a lot on the police in all of the counties. The truth of the matter is that the police answer to the mayor, so involving the mayors of all communities in being community builders, and encouraging.... A lot of what happened in Ottawa with regard to getting the religious community together was through the mayor's bully pulpit. I would suggest getting the mayors of all the cities in the country behind initiatives in each of their communities to ask what they can do to bring people together on a very tangible basis. Mayors have much more power than we realize.

Here it happened to the credit of Mayor Watson and the police chief. Every time any issue came up, all segments of the community were brought together by both of these gentlemen, and we worked together. This type of community-building coming from the mayor is also something that I think would be very helpful.

4:15 p.m.

Liberal

Julie Dabrusin Liberal Toronto—Danforth, ON

Thank you. I really like that idea about the intercommunity activities and getting MPs involved in building intercommunity bridges.

My next question is for Mr. Fogel. We've been looking at a report from the UN International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination. One part of that report talked about hate crimes. Because you spoke specifically about the hate crimes data gaps, I was hoping maybe you could help. One of the recommendations was that Canada facilitate reporting by victims of hate crimes. I was wondering if you had any thoughts. How can we help facilitate the reporting by victims?

4:15 p.m.

Chief Executive Officer, Centre for Israel and Jewish Affairs

Shimon Fogel

It goes back to the notion of the quality of the partnership between law enforcement and the affected communities. There has to be a level of confidence that sharing that information is going to be treated in a respectful and constructive way.

However, I also, frankly, have to flag a problem. People can have very subjective views about what constitutes a hate crime, and victims or alleged victims of those kinds of crimes also introduce their own subjective reality or perspective on it, which is why I think it is so important for this committee to either establish or encourage the creation of consistent and uniform criteria for what constitutes and what doesn't constitute hate crimes.

We in the Jewish community have a lot of experience with this. There are those, for example—and it's not a secret—even within the Jewish community, frankly, who are critical of one or another policy of a particular government of the State of Israel. Does criticism of that policy constitute anti-Semitism? I think our consensus, and certainly the IHRA consensus, is that it doesn't. Even though it may offend me personally or I may be aggrieved by it, it doesn't constitute anti-Semitism in the sense of a hate crime.

Similarly, I think that when we reflect on what we're going to build by way of a set of definitions and criteria for what constitute actionable offences, we have to be very precise and clear, and review them, because things change.

4:15 p.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Hedy Fry

Thank you very much.

You have one and a half minutes, Ms. Dabrusin.

4:15 p.m.

Liberal

Julie Dabrusin Liberal Toronto—Danforth, ON

The other thing I wanted to follow up on was that you mentioned the need for a universal model to be adopted. I'm trying to find your exact wording and I can't, but it was basically that we find a universal means of collecting hate crime data. I was wondering if there are any models that you've seen in other countries that we should be looking to as good models for collecting hate crime data.

4:15 p.m.

Chief Executive Officer, Centre for Israel and Jewish Affairs

Shimon Fogel

Very briefly, I think the U.K. is struggling with that right now. It has done a lot of work in that area. It would be worth our while to take a look at its experience and best practices, to see what to do and what not to do. I'm not aware of any country currently that has a successful generic model that can be applied. I think what that tells us is that each community has a unique set of considerations that flow into how it perceives things. We have to have sufficient flexibility to be able to reflect those nuanced differences between different communities. While we look in principle to achieve some kind of standardized set of definitions and criteria, they have to also reflect the individual circumstances and considerations of each particular community.

4:15 p.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Hedy Fry

Thank you very much.

Mr. Matas, I will allow you to go ahead.

4:15 p.m.

Senior Legal Counsel, National Office, B'nai Brith Canada

David Matas

I wonder if I could just add a sentence here. I would encourage the committee to look at what used to be the European Monitoring Centre on Racism and Xenophobia and is now the European Union Agency for Fundamental Rights. It originated the definition of anti-Semitism that eventually the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance adopted. It has come to grips with that very question. I think the committee could profitably look at its work.

4:15 p.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Hedy Fry

Thank you so much, David.

I want to thank the group for being here. You've given us a lot to chew on, a lot of substantive recommendations and a great deal of insight, so thank you for being here.

I will suspend the meeting for a few minutes so that we can get to the second hour.

Thank you.

4:35 p.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Hedy Fry

We will resume the committee hearing. Thank you.

If anyone from the last group wishes to stay, they're very welcome.

Having called the meeting to order, I would like to begin. This committee is studying, pursuant to Standing Order 108(2), systemic racism and religious discrimination in Canada.

We have two witnesses, and I would like to recognize them. We have Ms. Tamara Thomas from the African Canadian Legal Clinic and, from the Canadian Council of Imams, Mr. Sikander Hashmi. We will begin with Ms. Thomas.

The usual format is that you have 10 minutes to make your presentation. I'll warn you when you have two minutes left, and then we will go to questions and answers.

You may begin, Ms. Thomas. You have 10 minutes.

4:35 p.m.

Tamara Thomas Policy Researcher and Analyst, African Canadian Legal Clinic

Good afternoon, Madam Chair and committee members.

I appear here today on behalf of the African Canadian Legal Clinic. The ACLC was established in 1994. Our mandate is quite specific. We are a non-profit organization committed to combatting systemic and institutional anti-black racism in Canadian society. We represent and advocate on behalf of the African-Canadian community and we condemn all forms of systemic racism and Islamophobia.

I want to start off by thanking the committee for meeting with stakeholders in order to develop a thorough and comprehensive understanding of systemic racism and Islamophobia and to canvass ways in which to effectively and efficiently address these issues in our current diverse Canadian society. The ACLC fully supports this motion.

The African descendant community in Canada has many various intersecting identities, and many members of our community identify as Muslim. Members of our community are often targets of both systemic racism and Islamophobia. In today's diverse, pluralistic Canadian society, it is more important than ever that our government speak up and speak out against hate, racism, and religious intolerance through not only its words but by taking concrete action towards understanding, addressing, and eradicating systemic racism in Canada.

This motion is particularly important in a Canada that has seen a spike in anti-Muslim sentiment and a rise in white supremacist activity. According to a report released by Juristat this past June, black people in Canada have experienced the highest number of race-based hate crimes up to as recently as 2015. Between 2010 and 2015, over half of the violent hate crimes targeting black populations were committed by a stranger. Moreover, 65% of hate crimes were non-violent, and 55% of those non-violent crimes were recorded as being mischief. A terrifying 35% of hate crimes committed against black people in Canada between 2010 and 2015 were violent. Nineteen percent of these reported hate crimes were instances of assault.

These statistics only represent those hate crimes that were reported to the police. As has been mentioned by others, considering the tenuous relationship between the black community and the police, it's not hard to believe that those hate crimes that have been reported are vastly under-representive of the total number of hate crimes targeting black bodies in Canada. This motion presents a starting point for the government to begin taking concrete action to eradicate racial discrimination in this country.

My comments today will focus on systemic anti-black racism in Canada.

For those who may not be familiar with the term, anti-black racism is a form of systemic and institutionalized racism that specifically targets the black community. The ACLC defines anti-black racism as:

...the racial prejudice, stereotyping, and discrimination that is directed at people of African Descent, rooted in their unique history and experience of enslavement. It is manifested in the legacy and racist ideologies that continue to define African descendants' identities, their lives and places them at the bottom of society and as primary targets of racism. It is manifested in the legacy of the current social, economic, and political marginalization of African Canadians in society such as the lack of opportunities, lower socio-economic status, higher unemployment, significant poverty rates and over-representation in the criminal justice system. Anti-Black racism is characterized by particularly virulent and pervasive racial stereotypes. Canadian courts and various Commissions have repeatedly recognized the pervasiveness of anti-Black stereotyping and the fact that African Canadians are the primary targets of racism in Canadian society.

The various manifestations of systemic anti-black racism are, as I've said, broad and pervasive, with roots in our country's history of slavery and segregation. As recognized by the United Nations working group of experts on people of African descent in its report on its mission in Canada, which was released and adopted by the UN this past September, African descendants have been present in Canada for over 300 years, since the early 17th century. From that time until its abolition in 1834, slavery was also present and thriving in Canada. Even after slavery was abolished, African descendants in Canada faced legal and de facto segregation in every area of life. In fact, the last segregated school in Ontario closed as recently as 1965. It was not until 1983 that the last segregated school in Nova Scotia closed.

The situation of African Canadians is not improving, despite appearances to the opposite on the surface of Canadian society. The disparities resulting from slavery and segregation of the African descendant community in Canada are still very much alive. These disparities largely result from how those who historically have occupied positions of influence and power and who have historically not been black view black people, black bodies, and black families.

There continues to be a persistent trend of inequality and inequity when it comes to the African descendant community in Canada. African-Canadian youth are disproportionately apprehended by child welfare agencies, inappropriately and inequitably disciplined and streamed in schools, and trapped within the school-to-prison pipeline. African-Canadian men are overrepresented in corrections, where they are given neither the cultural programming nor the skills training nor the job opportunities needed to avoid re-incarceration. African-Canadian women are paid less than both African-Canadian men and white women in the workplace for doing the same work. The African-Canadian community is struggling with poverty, precarious housing, and untreated mental health issues, and we continue to be routinely profiled and targeted by the police, as is the case when African-Canadian men and youth are stopped and then carded by police officers, oftentimes for simply being in the wrong neighbourhood.

These are only a few of the instances of systemic anti-black racism. These are real stories. They occur every day. The ACLC hears these types of complaints on a weekly basis, and unfortunately our intake numbers have yet to drop.

In our recent submissions to the UN's Universal Periodic Review of Canada and to the UN's Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination, CERD, we included extensive statistics and case studies that truly exemplify the nature and existence of systemic anti-black racism in Canada. These submissions can be readily provided should you wish to examine the numbers for yourselves. Sadly, none of this is new. In 1992, Stephen Lewis recognized the prevalence of anti-black racism in his report on race relations to the Ontario premier of the day.

How does Canada approach this historic and pervasive problem? There are several suggestions that could be made, but today I will focus on a key few. Several of these, I believe, are reiterations of recommendations you have already heard from other community stakeholders.

First, the federal government must implement a mandatory nationwide disaggregated race-based data collection policy and strategy. It is impossible to solve a problem when you are unable to identify where the issue lies, or its gravity. This data collection must be mandatory across all federal and provincial ministries, agencies, and boards. The federal government needs to work with the provinces and territories, particularly those with high concentrations of African-Canadian and other racialized people, to develop a consistent data collection strategy. The federal government also needs to work with community groups to collect this data directly from the communities themselves.

Second, the federal government must also introduce a reinvigorated and robust national action plan against racism, updated to deal with the current realities of systemic racism in Canada—for example, the rise of Islamophobia. The new action plan should be the result of extensive consultations with all stakeholder groups and with an eye to intersectionality and the different ways in which systemic racism affects different racial groups. It should specifically acknowledge anti-black racism in Canada and provide effective ways by which to address anti-black racism.

Third, the federal government must also recognize that intergenerational poverty, homelessness, precarious housing, unemployment, and precarious employment are also a result of systemic racism and discrimination. It must work toward mandatory employment equity. In its poverty reduction strategy, the government has failed to engage a racial equity lens in order to examine the impact of race on housing, homelessness, and poverty, and fails to mention race in any substantive way. It is also necessary when dealing with these issues to engage the way in which precarious immigration status intersects with race.

In terms of other key recommendations for addressing systemic racism, particularly in regard to its impact on the African-Canadian community, I would urge the committee to review our submissions to the UN for CERD, the recommendations of the CERD committee, and the working group's recommendations for Canada.

In conclusion, the ACLC fully endorses this motion and recognizes its importance in Canadian society today as a means by which to take concrete action toward eradicating systemic racism and Islamophobia in Canada.

Thank you.

4:45 p.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Hedy Fry

Thank you, Ms. Thomas.

Now I will go to Mr. Hashmi.

4:45 p.m.

Sikander Hashmi Spokesperson, Canadian Council of Imams

On behalf of our members, thank you, Madam Chair and members of the committee, for giving our voices the opportunity to be heard today.

The Canadian Council of Imams was established in 1990 and is the only Canadian body that represents imams from across the country.

Canadian Muslims are not new to Canada. The first Muslim child on record to be born in this land was born in 1854, over a decade before Confederation. His name was James Love Jr., and he was born to James Love and Agnes Love.

It was another 84 years before Canada's first mosque opened in 1938. The building of the Al Rashid mosque in Edmonton was spearheaded by women, who approached then Mayor John Fry for land. They raised the $5,000 needed to establish the mosque from Muslim, Christian, and Jewish donors.

Today, like many other Canadians, the overwhelming majority of Canadian Muslims are grateful for the safety, prosperity, and opportunities offered by our country that enable them to study, work, worship, raise their families, and enjoy all that our country has to offer while giving back in a relatively safe and equitable environment. However, we see signs of trouble on the horizon.

As has been well established in the presence of this committee, hate crimes against Muslims are on the rise. The heartbreaking attack at the Islamic cultural centre in Quebec City on January 29 of this year was the single most horrific mass killing at a place of worship in Canadian history. Aboriginal, black, Jewish, and Sikh communities, among others, also continue to be targeted in Canada.

It would be naive at best to sit back and say that the government has no role to play in enhancing the safety, security, and inclusion of minorities in Canadian society. After all, democracy brings with it the responsibility to protect minorities from the tyranny of the majority.

The right to worship and practise one's faith freely and openly as one sees fit, without infringing upon the rights of others, is a fundamental right, yet this fundamental right of Canadian Muslims is being eroded by those who seek to instill fear within the Canadian Muslim community through attacks and intimidation tactics. This fear negatively impacts Canadian Muslim women and children in particular.

As imams, we often hear about cases of Canadian Muslim women being verbally harassed and in some cases physically attacked while going about their business. Such attacks leave deep psychological scars on the victims and on the broader Muslim community, leaving many women afraid to go out alone.

Children are not only bullied by their peers in schools. As we saw in the Peel region in Ontario, Muslim children were intimidated by protesters who were targeting schools. These children were singled out simply because they had exercised their fundamental right to attend Friday prayer services at school. Friday is the holiest day of the week for Muslims, and prayer services are held in the early afternoon.

Unlike Jews and Christians, Muslims do not have their holy day off. Therefore, prayers need to be held at school during lunch hours to accommodate students who believe attendance at Friday prayers is mandatory for them as observing Muslims. Making them choose between praying and studying would be a form of systemic discrimination.

In our view, the growing climate of fear is fuelled by a few factors.

First, violent radicals who claim to speak in the name of Islam—and against whom we continue to fight ideologically and through co-operation with authorities—have been given legitimacy by some political leaders, authorities, and the media through giving them the attention they crave and by accepting their misrepresentation of Islamic teachings as being true.

Terrorists use publicity to instill fear as a means of furthering their agendas. Deprive them of publicity, and you suck the oxygen out of their narrative. In practical terms, this means reducing the coverage of terrorism trials and radical propaganda, such as videos. The foiling of terror plots, including the one that was foiled after a tip from a Canadian imam, should be announced and treated by authorities in the same way as other criminal activity. Doing otherwise feeds the violent radical ego and narrative.

Second, those who harbour hatred against Islam and Muslims, or against certain subsects within Islam, often use as examples actions by Muslims in other parts of the world—which many times are misrepresented—as a reason for fearing Canadian Muslims. Let us be clear: we are Canadians. We have encouraged and will continue to encourage the practice of Islam in Canada in a manner that does not contravene Canadian law and that is protected by the fundamental charter freedoms of conscience, religion, thought, belief, opinion, and expression.

When speaking about Muslims or any other group in Canada, it is crucial that we base our discussions on the current realities as lived in Canada, because Canada is unique and the Canadian Muslim experience is unique. It must not be conflated with the realities of Muslims elsewhere in the world.

Haters generally prey upon those who are generally ignorant, spreading fear and mistrust, particularly through the Internet, by highlighting isolated incidents or by misrepresenting facts. For example, a tragic family killing in Ottawa last year was determined by authorities to be a case of family violence involving clear evidence of mental health issues. It was not an honour killing, yet a radical Canadian media outlet not only promoted a conspiracy that the crime was an honour killing, which is un-Islamic, but even went so far as to visit the Islamic school where one of the victims once taught, and did so while children were present; intimidated the staff for supposedly covering up an honour killing; filmed outside the school; and then posted the video on its website. Parents are now afraid that a follower of this website, who believes this false narrative of an honour killing cover-up, could end up attacking this school and their children, yet everyone appears to be helpless in stopping this type of fake news, which can have very real consequences.

Racist and bigoted thoughts cannot be legislated, but actions can be. We believe that all Canadians, in particular community leaders and our elected leaders, have a moral duty to stem the rise of hate in Canada, which is clearly having a really negative impact on the lives of minority Canadians. Therefore we propose six concrete steps that the government and our elected leaders can take to address the rise of hate in Canada.

First, to further protect religious property, consider expanding subsection 430(4.1) of the Criminal Code to include religious schools, and also remove the specific element to make the offence a general offence. A specific intent imposes an additional burden on the prosecutor to prove, and gives the perpetrator one more defence.

Second, consider expanding section 319 to characterize all physical attacks against religious symbols in public places, including those worn by individuals, such as the hijab, turban, kippah, and cross, as public incitement of hatred or wilful promotion of hatred.

Third, increase funding for law enforcement and security agencies to investigate hate speech on the Internet, to enforce existing laws, and to gather intelligence on, investigate, and prosecute radical individuals and groups who believe in terrorizing Canadian minorities through criminal acts with the same vigour and allocation of resources as has been done so far against individuals and groups who believe in terrorizing Canadians indiscriminately through criminal acts.

Fourth, consider creating safe zones outside all schools when children are present so that protestors are required to give safe, intimidation-free passage to children to and from school.

Fifth, model the promotion of understanding and diversity—not necessarily agreement—in all federal agencies and the public service by mandating, on a regular basis, sessions featuring interaction with members of diverse and minority groups for all management-level and front-line employees.

Sixth, run regular national public awareness campaigns to instill a sense of national pride in Canadian diversity and to highlight the positive contributions of Canadians of all types.

I'm sure we can all agree that our country is a great blessing that we want to continue to build and improve. For that, we must start with us as individuals, and then as communities, and as a nation.

May God keep our country and its citizens safe. May God make it safer and more welcoming for all.

Thank you.

4:55 p.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Hedy Fry

Thank you very much.

Now we go to the second part of this exercise, which is questions and answers.

The first round is a seven-minute round. The seven minutes include the questions and answers, so I'm going to ask everyone again to please be concise. I know this subject is important and that everyone wants to elaborate, but then I have to cut you off when you're trying to get to where you really want to go. Let's be mindful of that.

We begin now with the first round of seven minutes. We begin with Mr. Vandal from the Liberals.