Human Resources Committee on March 9th, 2026

[The Chair (Robert Morrissey (Egmont, Lib.)), Liberal, Bobby Morrissey]

I call the meeting to order.

Good afternoon, committee members. The clerk has advised me that we have quorum and that the sound for those appearing virtually has been tested. With that, I will open meeting number 27 of the Standing Committee on Human Resources, Skills and Social Development and the Status of Persons with Disabilities. Pursuant to the order of reference of Wednesday, February 4, the committee is meeting on Bill C-222.

Today's meeting is taking place in a hybrid format, pursuant to the Standing Orders of the House. Meeting members will appear in person or virtually. Before we begin, there are a few rules. I would ask all members to please silence the devices that are with you during the meeting. Please refrain from tapping on the boom of your microphone, for the protection of the interpreters. You have the option of choosing to participate in the official language of your choice. In the room, make sure you're on the channel that gives you the language you wish to participate in. If you're appearing virtually, please click on the globe icon at the bottom of your Surface and choose the official language of your choice. If there is an interruption in interpretation services, please get my attention and we'll suspend while it is corrected. As well, please direct all questions through the chair and wait until I recognize you by name before you participate or respond.

I would like to welcome our witnesses. As individuals, we have Nora Spinks, chief executive officer, Work-Life Harmony Enterprises Ltd.; and Carmen Wu, appearing virtually. From Metro Vancouver Empty Cradle Bereaved Parents Society, we have Nancy Slinn, director, and Peter Slinn, director. From SIDS Calgary Society, we have Sarah Cormier, chair, and Lee Cormier, member-at-large.

Each witness will have five minutes for their opening statement. Please remember to speak slowly so that the interpreters can correctly translate what you're saying.

We will begin with Ms. Spinks.

Ms. Spinks, you have the floor for five minutes.

[Nora Spinks, Chief Executive Officer, Work-Life Harmony Enterprises Ltd. As an Individual]

Mr. Chairman and members of the committee, thank you for the invitation to join you today for this important conversation.

I am here today speaking in support of Evan's law.

As a member of this committee, you will hear from HR professionals and frontline managers who have grieving parents return to work before they are ready and sit in meetings crying quietly. You will hear from health care professionals who hold the hands of their grieving patients and know that on top of their grief, they will also lose access to EI benefits but know now is not the time to share that information.

Most importantly, you will hear from families who have experienced the unimaginable, the loss every parent fears: the loss of an infant and the loss of their hopes and dreams for a life that will not be. You will hear from families about their pain and their grief. You will hear about their experiences and frustrations with the EI system, which was never designed to include support for grieving parents. You will hear about what it feels like when they receive a letter from Service Canada, demanding that they pay back the benefits they inadvertently received, because they are no longer eligible and because they didn't inform Service Canada quickly enough about their loss in order to stop those payments in the first place. You will hear from them how under the current EI program, grieving families are excluded and prevented from receiving fair treatment.

My name is Nora Spinks. As the chairman stated, I'm the CEO of Work-Life Harmony. Today, I bring a policy perspective to this conversation. I've been informing federal family policy for several decades. In the past, I was involved in informing change to extend maternity and parental leave options to include both a 12-month and an 18-month benefit.

I was involved in developing the compassionate care benefit, which is now available under the EI program; the CCB provides people on temporary leave up to six months' worth of benefits to care for somebody who is at the end of life.

Recently, as the chair of the National Seniors Council, I was involved in advising the ministers of health and seniors on policy and benefits for older adults in Canada.

As the current chair of Veterans Affairs' ministerial family advisory group, I am involved in informing policies focusing on the well-being and quality of life of veterans and veteran families, such as the introduction of the veteran caregiver recognition benefit.

Good public policy is fair and equitable, without barriers to access and with minimal administrative burden. The late Jane Jacobs, an influential Canadian activist who shaped our policies designed to enhance quality of life, was once credited as saying that good public policy comes when decision-makers see in their mind's eye the people most affected by it.

Evan's law is good public policy. Evan's law reduces barriers to EI benefits and reduces administrative burden for grieving families. Evan's law recognizes and supports families that experience the unimaginable. Evan's law improves the grieving family's quality of life. Evan's law sends a message to all families, especially to grieving families, that the Government of Canada sees you, hears you and is here to support you in your time of unimaginable grief. With Evan's law, families will no longer have to remember to contact Service Canada when the item at the top of their to-do list is to pick out a coffin for their infant.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

[The Chair, Liberal, Bobby Morrissey]

Thank you so much, Ms. Spinks.

We will now move to Ms. Wu for five minutes or less.

Ms. Wu, you have the floor.

[Carmen Wu, As an Individual]

Thank you for the opportunity to speak today. My name is Carmen Wu, and I'm here to share my experience navigating employment insurance after the stillbirth of my daughter, Olivia, in 2017. Olivia was stillborn at 40 weeks. At that time, I was already receiving maternity benefits. I knew that I would need to cancel the parental benefits portion of my leave.

When it came time to address my parental leave, I learned that I couldn't make the required changes online, so I went into a Service Canada office. I remember standing in line, knowing that when I reached a counter, I would have to tell the staff that my baby had died. The staff there were kind and compassionate and tried to help in every way they could. My experience is not about the individuals working within the system but the process requiring me to relive my loss in a very public setting at a time when I was barely functioning.

The people at the office told me that once my maternity benefit ended, I could return, and they would help me access additional time off. In that moment, I did not fully understand what that meant. I never went back to find out. When you're grieving the loss of a child, even the simple administrative tasks can feel overwhelming. Forms, timelines and eligibility requirements require a level of focus and clarity that many grieving parents simply do not have. I could not imagine having to stand in that line for a second time. I was fortunate to have a supportive workplace and family that allowed me additional time away from work. Not every parent has that, and even though I had that support, returning to work was mentally very difficult.

The changes proposed under Bill C-222 would help families like mine. It would allow parents who have lost their baby to continue receiving their benefits without having to re-explain their loss or reapply during the most painful time of their lives. It would give grieving parents the space to heal without the added burden of bureaucracy. No grieving parent should have to stand at a government counter to explain that their baby has died in order to receive the time they need to grieve.

Thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, Bobby Morrissey]

Thank you, Ms. Wu.

We will now move to Mr. Slinn and Ms. Slinn. I understand you're going to share your opening statement. Please proceed.

[Nancy Slinn, Director, Metro Vancouver Empty Cradle Bereaved Parents Society]

Thank you, Mr. Chair, for the honour and privilege of being here to share our statement with you this afternoon.

Because of my vision disability, I'm going to ask my husband to read my statement for you.

[Peter Slinn, Director, Metro Vancouver Empty Cradle Bereaved Parents Society]

I'm speaking for Nancy.

Over 30 years ago we experienced the stillbirth of our daughter Angel at 20 weeks' gestation. That's far enough along to have fingerprints and eyebrows but not far enough along to meet the world. At that time, and still largely today, this type of loss at 20 weeks falls into a legislative grey area.

Nancy was not eligible for maternity benefits. She was granted one week of leave by the employer. Within those seven days of notifying family and friends, arranging a funeral and burial, supporting our own six-year-old daughter as she went through her first experience meeting death, all of that had to occur ahead of processing our own physical and emotional trauma in the situation.

There were challenges to premature job re-entry. After a week, it's not a full recovery. It's a survival tactic...for the bank. Anyway, in Nancy's case, she was marked with extreme exhaustion and the constant threat of public triggers, such as encountering an infant on a public transit commute—that nearly broke her resolve.

Furthermore, Nancy witnessed the unique burdens placed on me, her husband, as I was expected to be strong despite having even fewer support structures than she did. Bill C-222 is essential because that can provide recognition for both parents, if needed, to give them time and financial security while healing from a trauma.

There's a growing need for this. When we took over the Metro Vancouver Empty Cradle Bereaved Parents Society in 2005, we hoped the need for such a group would eventually diminish, but instead, our outreach has grown. We have over 350 families on our mailing list, and this highlights a painful truth. Medical care has advanced, but the financial and emotional safety nets for grieving parents have not.

Thus, Nancy recommends that newly bereaved Canadian parents should not have to choose between financial survival and mental health, and urges the committee to pass Bill C-222 without delay. Let us ensure that the next generation of parents has the support that was unavailable to our family.

Now, in addition to that, I have my own observations that are worth sharing here. I found that, as a father and in working through Empty Cradle's peer support group, I did not find any clarity within Canada's Labour Code regarding workplace bereavement after a stillbirth. We had to wing it. Sadly, this has not changed much in the intervening time. I had to negotiate for an additional three days of leave—not much—and had to take those days from my allotted vacation time. Then, upon return, I faced the emotional trauma of workplace triggers. A few days after the stillbirth, a co-worker dropped by, not knowing that we had suffered loss, to show off their newborn child. I was not well equipped to handle this so soon after our loss.

A short-term return to work situation after a loss, therefore, has a few flaws, which often have an impact on workplace retention. While working with Empty Cradle, we have often heard of reduced emotional capacity, as grieving parents are less capable of managing workplace stresses or conflicts with co-workers, certain staff or clients, and this too has led to forced resignations. We've witnessed cases in which a teacher or a child care worker and others were forced to basically bail on their employment situations. Financial need had driven them back to work before they were emotionally or physically ready to do what their job routinely entailed. It is not economically efficient, in those cases, to have inadequate leave leading to unsuccessful reintegration and increased work conflicts, and, after having to leave a job, more difficult EI claims due to such job loss.

We recommend that, within the focus of Bill C-222, this committee carefully consider the following. How about timeline parity? Recovery from an infant loss typically requires a timeline similar to that after a live birth. Both situations involve significant physical and psychological demands, including the risk of postpartum depression, which is too often a factor after a loss, not just after a normal birth, and, if present, is usually detected weeks after the birth situation.

There are now also complex medical diagnoses. More recently, parents are being faced with ethical dilemmas regarding whether to even continue with a pregnancy after discovering a major health issue or a terminal condition. They so require the financial backstop of this bill to give them time to process consenting to a life-altering decision without having to think about the financial fears on top of their medical trauma. It is nearly impossible to discuss these situations with family, friends or co-workers around a pregnancy termination decision.

What about the gig economy? We understand that this may be outside the scope of this bill, but we must highlight that contract workers and gig workers will remain unprotected. I would encourage this committee to keep those vulnerable workers in mind for legislative scrutiny whenever any employment status loopholes are possibly detected.

In conclusion, properly worded legislation within Canada's employment framework will reduce or prevent job re-entry difficulties that we and so many others have faced in such situations.

Thank you again, Mr. Chair, for your time, and thank you to the committee and other witnesses for working to make Bill C-222 a robust support for all Canadians.

[The Chair, Liberal, Bobby Morrissey]

Thank you, Nancy, if I may, for your opening comments, and thank you, Peter, for your supporting comments on this important piece of legislation.

We will now move to SIDS Calgary Society. We have Sarah Cormier, chair, and Lee Cormier, member-at-large.

Are you making the statement, Ms. Cormier?

[Sarah Cormier, Chair, SIDS Calgary Society]

We'll be sharing it. Thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, Bobby Morrissey]

You have the floor.

[Sarah Cormier]

Thank you, Mr. Chair and members of the committee. My name is Sarah Cormier. This is my husband, Lee Cormier. We are here today in two capacities—as advocates who have spent a decade fighting for legislative change, but most importantly, in our favourite role, as parents of Quinn Isla Cormier. Quinn died on December 28, 2014, from sudden infant death syndrome.

Our journey began with motion 110, a call to action that laid the groundwork for what we are discussing today. We have spent over a decade telling the story of our Quinn and her legacy, so that other parents wouldn't have to fight the government while they were fighting to survive their own grief.

When Quinn died, the world stopped. Standing at the Service Canada office less than a week after Quinn died, we were told, “Your child ceases to exist, therefore your benefits cease to exist.” Under our current employment insurance system, the moment a child dies, a parent's eligibility to be supported vanishes.

I want you to imagine the administrative cruelty of that. Within days of losing Quinn, we were thrust into a world of grief and were seen as debtors in the eyes of the system. The current system is telling parents to navigate a complex bureaucratic maze at the exact moment we are most broken. The system is telling them that their role as a parent, and the support that comes with that, ends the second a child dies. Bill C-222 says otherwise. It says that the care doesn't end; it just changes form.

When we introduced motion 110 years ago, we were asking for a foot in the door. We were asking for the government to recognize that infant loss is a unique, devastating gap in our social safety net. The seven recommendations put forth in the 2018 parliamentary report “Supporting Families After the Loss of a Child” were very clear. I'd like to draw your attention to this recommendation: “ensure that there are ways to make reporting the death of a child [seamless], easier and less traumatic to parents to ensure that parents are treated with compassion”.

In the 10 years since we started this work, thousands of Canadian families have fallen through that gap. They have missed payments. They have had to make the choice between paying for a funeral or paying their rent. They have been forced back to work while still in shock. Bill C-222 is the culmination of a decade of heartbreak and hope. It provides continuity. It ensures that maternity leave and parental leave remain intact, giving families the grace period they need to breathe without the fear of an EI clawback.

[Lee Cormier, Member-at-Large, SIDS Calgary Society]

We're often asked why we have stayed in the fight for 10 years. The answer is simple. We promised Quinn that her life would matter not just to us but to the laws of the country.

By passing Bill C-222, you're telling grieving parents across Canada that their government sees them. You're removing the financial penalty of child loss. We urge you to move this bill forward through committee and back to the House without delay. Let's finish what we started 10 years ago.

Thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, Bobby Morrissey]

Thank you, Sarah and Lee, for your compelling testimony before the committee today.

With that, we will go to the first round of questioning from committee members. We'll begin with Mr. Richards, who is joining us today.

You have six minutes, please.

[Blake Richards, Conservative, Airdrie—Cochrane, AB]

First of all, to each of the parents here who has had the courage to share their horrible, tragic experiences with this committee for the benefit of this Parliament, thank you for your courage to come forward to do that and for the honour that brings to your angel babies, to Quinn, to Olivia, to the Slinns' daughter Angel and to all of the other angel babies out there. Thank you for your courage to be here. I know it can't be easy.

There are a few things I want to try to address. Let me speak first to the importance of the idea of a bereavement leave, which is essentially what this bill creates. It's not what it's called, but it's essentially what it's creating.

I'm going to ask you this, Lee. Tell me if you're not comfortable speaking about this, and it's fine if you're not. I know that you tried to return to work very shortly after Quinn's death. Would you be willing to tell this committee about the experience and what that was like? You had to make that choice given the situation you were in.

[Lee Cormier]

I think it was probably within two weeks that I made the decision to go back to work. Putting yourself in that situation.... I mean, I'm a power lineman. I do dangerous work fairly regularly. The company that I work for definitely made it much easier. They made it important that somebody was with me all the time, to make sure that I was focused and safe.

You don't really have the ability to make good decisions early on, definitely. Even just struggling with day-to-day things is enough, without throwing work in, dangerous work, or any of those kinds of things. It definitely puts people into a scenario where you're just kind of floating through life, not really focusing on much of anything.

[Blake Richards, Conservative, Airdrie—Cochrane, AB]

Thanks for sharing that. None of us wants to have to imagine ourselves in the shoes that you were in. That's why this is so important. Maybe that just flows into the question that I want to ask next.

Over the last decade or so, I've worked with you. In fact, you were very humble. You were the impetus behind all this. How this all got started was when you came to tell me about your daughter Quinn.

Also, Nancy and Peter, I know we've worked together over the last number of years as well. I want to ask both of you to tell us a bit about the advocacy and what the roadblocks were that you faced as you fought through M-110 the last time the HUMA committee did the report. I want to ask you that because I think it's important for people on this committee to hear what we don't want to see repeated again and what we don't want to have happen, and for all members of Parliament to understand why it is so important that this passes, that this doesn't just become a report somewhere or fall by the wayside. This has to get done.

I want you both to have a chance to speak about the advocacy you've done and the roadblocks you've faced, so that we can make sure that those situations aren't repeated again this time, particularly with the committee process and whatnot.

Do you want to start, Sarah and Lee? Then we'll go to Nancy and Peter.

[Sarah Cormier]

In my testimony, I mentioned those seven recommendations from that initial report. Hopefully, those are somewhere that is visible to all of you. I feel as though the recommendations are straightforward and clear. They're great recommendations from the testimony of other individuals like us and from research. I feel as though the recommendations are very clear and beneficial for parents with all types of losses.

We aren't good employees. I'll be the first to tell you that I was not a good employee, returning after Quinn died. If we hadn't had the family that we do or the employers that we had at that time, we wouldn't be where we are today.

We've come across so many families that have had to make that choice. Do I pay my rent or do I have a funeral? Do I return to work? Who cares for my other children as they're navigating this?

The time it has taken is the biggest roadblock. We can't press enough upon you the urgency to move this forward so parents aren't falling through the cracks anymore.

[Blake Richards, Conservative, Airdrie—Cochrane, AB]

Thank you for that.

Hopefully, I'll get a chance to ask Carmen a question in a future round, because I did have a question for her.

For the last of my time, I want to give Nancy and Peter a chance to address how important it is to move this forward and that it doesn't get watered down.

[Nancy Slinn]

I would like to say that our losses occurred in the early nineties. There was absolutely nothing available to help parents. People did not understand. They didn't know how to deal with us. They didn't know how to talk with us.

When we found Empty Cradle two months after the loss of our daughter, we immediately began to get involved by being on the board and helping to run the support group meetings. We wanted to give parents an outlet, as someone they could listen to and who truly understood. I cannot believe that 30 years later, there is still not much support out there for parents who have endured a loss.

[Peter Slinn]

In the 41st or 42nd Parliament, when motion 110 was put forward, everybody voted for it at first and second reading. It went to committee. As a committee chair, Mr. Morrissey, I'm sure you understand that there's a lot of pressure to get things done. There was not a lot of time and, unfortunately, it was not perceived that the time could draw to a close. The chair at the time, Dan Ruimy, had a number of get-togethers for hearing it through, but time ran out.

It was a close Parliament. There was a call for an election, and that ended everything. We tried again in the next Parliament, and it ended again. That's what we're possibly up against this time. It is a close House. It's not 200 to 100 or something. We need to get this through quickly and keep a priority on that.

[The Chair, Liberal, Bobby Morrissey]

Thank you, Mr. Richards, and Mr. and Mrs. Slinn.

Ms. Koutrakis, you have the floor for six minutes.

[Annie Koutrakis, Liberal, Vimy, QC]

I'm very moved by your testimony. Being a parent myself and a new grandmother—my little granddaughter is six and a half months old—I can't even begin to understand how incredibly difficult it must be for you to be here today to share with us so generously your experience without it bringing up all those memories that I'm sure you try so hard to live with every single day of your life. Thank you very much for that.

Ms. Spinks, in your experience what are some of the best practices that employers can adopt to ensure that parents returning to work after a loss feel supported and respected?

[Nora Spinks]

There are three very distinct elements that need to be in harmony in order to support parents who are going through this experience. One of them is the benefits. That's what we're talking about here today. There are also the leave provisions. That's the job protection—remaining attached to the paid labour force. That's also important, along with the changes to EI or changes to the Labour Code, but not all employees are covered by the Canada Labour Code. We'll also need to see this roll out to the provincial employment standards and to all the collective agreements across the country. The third element is the employers. Employers also need support, training, resources and tools in order to inform and support their employees as they are returning.

As you said, this is something that is unimaginable. It's also something about which people often say they don't know what to say and they're afraid they're going to say something wrong. Part of having this law and these benefits is it gives people the training and the tools they need, and the language, so that they too can demonstrate how supportive they are and not close up for fear that they're going to say something wrong.

[Annie Koutrakis, Liberal, Vimy, QC]

Mr. and Mrs. Slinn, from your experience working with bereaved families, are there additional steps governments could take to better support parents during this period? Obviously, the financial piece is very big, and it's something that parents don't want to have to deal with while they're grieving the loss and just getting used to the new reality, unfortunately. Besides that, is there something else that we could be doing?

[Nancy Slinn]

As a society, we do not understand how to handle grief. Most people's reaction, their attitude, whether they're employers or members of the public or even members of our own family, is, you're young. You can have another baby. These things happen. You're not alone. But you feel so very alone. You can never replace that child. We had two early miscarriages before we lost Angel. We lost Angel at 20 weeks. I can still tell you everything about the day that we lost our daughter and what happened and the reactions and how I felt.

I'm not alone. Last night, we met with a young woman who also lost her sons due to stillbirth in the 1990s. We had become pen pals before the Internet and support groups even existed. She told me the same thing. We talked long and hard last night about how she felt and how she could still remember everything about her children, about the experience. That, again, was over 30 years ago.