Evidence of meeting #14 for Justice and Human Rights in the 43rd Parliament, 2nd Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was therapy.
A recording is available from Parliament.
11:45 a.m.
NDP
Randall Garrison NDP Esquimalt—Saanich—Sooke, BC
The bill doesn't actually specifically address gender expression.
Mr. Saddleback, I would like you to talk a bit more about whether you think a bill that leaves out gender expression could be adequate.
11:45 a.m.
Co-Chair, 2 Spirits in Motion
I think that's a huge gap when we're looking at this bill. If you look at the Charter of Rights and Freedoms, gender expression is alluded to within it, if not clearly stated. For this bill to leave that out, I think it's a huge miss.
When we look at conversion therapy, and coming back to my point about this larger systemic and societal viewpoint of what gender is, and what sexual and/or romantic orientation is, we also have to understand that the outdated, archaic mentalities of gender and gender norms certainly do put people in harm's way.
If you look at a young boy who's dressing in “feminine clothing”, and then for this to be seen as an opportunity for conversion to happen because they are not dressing “like a boy”, that itself is concerning if this is not included in the bill.
11:45 a.m.
NDP
Randall Garrison NDP Esquimalt—Saanich—Sooke, BC
In your presentation you talked about various forms of conversion therapy going on in the margins in first nation communities.
Could you talk a little bit more about what you have observed of these kinds of practices.
11:45 a.m.
Co-Chair, 2 Spirits in Motion
I say this with the greatest of care, as I believe that this particular aspect of the bill, and the education and awareness that needs to take place within indigenous communities, need to be done by indigenous communities for indigenous communities.
I believe that's where the 2 Spirits in Motion Society, as well as many of our other colleagues across Canada, will be able to have these discussions with our own community members.
When it comes to the events that have taken place, and the things we have observed, and the stories we have heard, unfortunately, some of our cultural leaders are still reeling from the effects of colonization where the aspects of cisnormativity and heteronormativity are certainly still steeped within that trauma that everyone is still reeling from, more specifically within residential schools where that was then instilled in our young indigenous children who now are adults.
It comes in the form of cultural ceremonies. Even for myself, and I will speak very freely about this, I did have a cultural leader of mine who, unfortunately, for lack of a better word, tried to exorcise me in regard to who I am as a trans man and as a gay man to let me know that I was not supposed to exist.
I think that itself highlighted for me the true impact of colonization and these mentalities on indigenous communities. I think it's very important and vital that we take these intersectional viewpoints of this bill, and I circle back to the fact that it has to happen by community for community when moving forward.
11:45 a.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Iqra Khalid
Thank you, Mr. Garrison.
We will now go into our second round of questions starting with Mr. Cooper, for five minutes.
Go ahead, sir.
11:45 a.m.
Conservative
Michael Cooper Conservative St. Albert—Edmonton, AB
Thank you very much, Madam Chair, and I want to thank all of the witnesses for your very important testimony as we consider Bill C-6.
I'm going to direct my questions to Mr. Ruba.
Mr. Ruba, through you, Madam Chair, we heard from witnesses on Tuesday who expressed concern that Bill C-6 would create a chilling effect on counsellors and medical professionals who may fear consequences for providing any services that could help patients like you manage unwanted behaviours or attractions.
Have you experienced this chill effect?
11:45 a.m.
Advisor, Association for Reformed Political Action Canada
Yes. Actually I have already talked to a Christian counsellor who I know in Calgary. As many of you know, a bylaw that is written in a similar way to the federal law is already in place in Calgary. One Christian counsellor I talked to has already said that she's very scared of talking about this with her clients. Another pastor told me that she was very scared of even returning the calls of people asking for support from people of her own faith.
So the chilling effect is real. On being able to access this service, I disagree with the member, Mr. Maloney, because this bill says that I cannot access or pay for a service that everyone else can, based solely on my sexual orientation and faith. That's outright discrimination.
I'm actually pretty saddened and appalled that people who speak about being able to express and respect the diversity of this country would completely ignore what I just said as a person who benefited from this counselling and freely chose to get it.
I represent dozens of people who agree with me on this, and we have a right to at least be acknowledged that we exist. The last testimony we just heard basically said that we don't, and that's sad for a group of people who want to argue for diversity.
11:50 a.m.
Conservative
Michael Cooper Conservative St. Albert—Edmonton, AB
Mr. Ruba, the government has provided assurances that your rights won't be infringed upon. You spoke about the effect that the bylaw in Calgary has had on your ability to access counselling services that you freely want to access. Can you speak to the government's assurances that there really is nothing to worry about here?
11:50 a.m.
Advisor, Association for Reformed Political Action Canada
If there were nothing to worry about, then they wouldn't even be having to add information on the website saying that conversations wouldn't be included. The problem, as I said, is the addition of the phrase “repress or reduce non-heterosexual behaviour”. There are many reasons anyone, even if they don't want to change their sexual orientation or gender identity, would want to reduce sexual behaviour, as I mentioned. There are LGBT people who support what we're saying when it comes to this, because they ought to have the same rights as every other Canadian to access care. There's a difference between banning bad methodologies, which we all agree on doing, and telling Canadians what goals they should be able to achieve.
A counsellor is like a GPS: You plug in the information and she tells you how to get there, but it's our decision to decide where we want to go. If I choose to be chaste and celibate, which I am.... If there were a movie called “The 44-Year-Old Virgin”, I would be the star. That would be me.
The point is that it's my decision. If I have a right to be chaste and celibate, then I ought to have the right to choose a counsellor who I can pay for, just like everybody else.
11:50 a.m.
Conservative
Michael Cooper Conservative St. Albert—Edmonton, AB
You noted that the definition in the legislation is novel in that no professional body has any similar or same definition as that provided for in the bill. Can you speak to that a little more? As you do so, would you also perhaps elaborate on changes you would like to see to the bill to ensure that individuals like you are not discriminated against from accessing counselling that you desire?
11:50 a.m.
Advisor, Association for Reformed Political Action Canada
Again, just simply adding the word “coercion” to practice or therapy, right at the start of the definition, would make this very fair and very safe and acknowledge the right that people like myself exist. We have a right to access this care.
When it comes to being able to just look at the counselling opportunities and the support, if we have a right to choose what our sexual practices are, even if that means choosing to be a virgin until you're 44, then we have to have a right to get that support.
When it comes to what's happening in Calgary now, there is a radical chilling effect in what's happening to churches. They're very scared. They actually say that they have to be willing to challenge the law even just to do their job as believers, whether they're Christians, Sikhs, Hindus or Muslims. There's a billion people who believe that when it comes to sexuality, God designed it for a husband and wife in marriage. We have a right to live according to those beliefs and practice that. This bill says your goal is wrong, and it dictates what a religious goal should be. That is not something that jives with the Charter of Rights and Freedoms.
11:50 a.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Iqra Khalid
Thank you very much.
We'll now move on to Mr. Sangha for five minutes.
Go ahead, Mr. Sangha.
11:50 a.m.
Liberal
Ramesh Sangha Liberal Brampton Centre, ON
Thank you, Madam Chair. Thanks a lot.
Thank you very much to the witnesses for your valuable input on this very delicate issue.
My question is for Erika Muse, who has already gone through the statement declaring that she was the victim of this therapy.
Thank you very much for the testimony. The issue before us today is very important, one that will affect Canadians from coast to coast to coast. I have heard from some critics that conversion therapy isn't an issue in Canada, but I don't believe that to be true. Even one Canadian being subject to this abhorrent practice is wrong.
Can you comment on the prevalence of this practice and why the legislation is a necessity?
11:55 a.m.
As an Individual
I can absolutely comment on the prevalence of this practice and the necessity of the legislation. Unfortunately, we don't have numbers about how many people went through CAMH because of how scarring and hurtful a process it was.
What I can say is that universally, every single trans person who is out and who is trying to seek gender-affirming care has already had an incredibly intense process of coming to terms with themselves. As part of this, they are always being confronted by people with these conversion therapy ideas, like autogynephilia and rapid-onset gender dysphoria, from critics and people who don't want them to transition. Again, these are practices in conversion therapies that come from Canada, that come from Toronto, that are practised in Toronto to this day.
What we do here changes the script. What we do here says these ideas are not credible and refuses to allow them to be perpetrated against trans people from coast to coast here in Canada and elsewhere in the world, period. This is no longer something that is acceptable in 2020, basically.
11:55 a.m.
Liberal
Ramesh Sangha Liberal Brampton Centre, ON
Okay.
I do agree that it will affect the LGBTQ people in a broad way.
What is your position when it comes to the question of children?
11:55 a.m.
As an Individual
I want to respond to something that Jack Saddleback said. He mentioned that gender expression is often how children are identified for trans-conversion therapy, which is very true. Dr. Zucker mentioned in his testimony on Tuesday that a child who is seen to be gender non-conforming, such as wearing a dress or playing with the wrong toys, was a frequent referral to a clinic and a frequent referral to his private practice now.
Those same ideas are the ones used against children, and they make it even harder for children, even at a young age, to define themselves, when the idea of exploring who they are is thought of as something that needs to be brought to therapy.
It might not be wrong. Often, one of the statements that gets said is that these children will not turn out to be trans, which is fine and true, but the idea that these need to be medicalized hurts everybody—both trans and cis people.
11:55 a.m.
Liberal
Ramesh Sangha Liberal Brampton Centre, ON
I personally don't believe that it is morally right to push someone for conversion therapy.
At the same time, I asked the same question of Minister Bardish Chagger, who was here the day before yesterday for the statement. [Inaudible—Editor] in the community, which is diverse and inclusiveness, is there in our community.
Anyone can answer. Perhaps Mr. Jack Saddleback can answer this one regarding the question of morality included in these type of therapies.
11:55 a.m.
Co-Chair, 2 Spirits in Motion
Morality, when it comes to the situations of conversion therapy.... Honestly, I throw this mirror back on Canada: Exactly what are we talking about when we're looking at conversion itself?
I bring my point back to the heteropatriarchal cisnormative, gender binary and the heteronormative narrative that is placed upon these lands that keep people—trans, cisgender and people of all different sexual and romantic orientations—within these archaic mentalities of what it means to be human. We're trying to convert people into one way of thinking and into one way of being, when in actuality the human experience is diverse. People deserve to live free, full and fulfilling lives.
This bill needs to pass to ensure that we are protecting all Canadians, especially our young Canadians, who are simply trying to explore themselves.
Thank you.
11:55 a.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Iqra Khalid
Thank you very much, Mr. Saddleback.
You're out of time, Mr. Sangha.
We'll move on to Mr. Fortin for two and a half minutes.
11:55 a.m.
Bloc
Rhéal Fortin Bloc Rivière-du-Nord, QC
Thank you, Madam Chair.
This is a really delicate topic, and I see, like probably everyone here, that we don't really have enough time to cover the issue. That's unfortunate, but I think that we should still talk about it. Every piece of testimony is teaching me a bit more about this, and I thank the witnesses for that.
Mr. Ruba, if I have understood correctly, you feel that what is referred to as good faith conversations where no one is trying to influence anyone is something that should continue with young people as with everyone else. You think discussions should be allowed between a pastor, a psychologist or someone else and a young person about their sexual orientation or their gender identity, provided that no attempt is being made to influence the young person.
Did I understand that correctly?
Noon
Advisor, Association for Reformed Political Action Canada
Again, I believe in good-faith conversations, sir. I support that very much. However, I don't agree that any conversations have any kind of lack of influence.
When I studied journalism, one of the arguments we had was whether we can actually be objective as journalists. The answer is no. We all have biases. Your question has a bias leading to what you want me to say. That's absolutely fine; you have a right to do that. All we're asking is that we all have a right to do that.
I'm a youth pastor as well. This kind of law.... Let me give you an example.
If a 14-year-old girl in my youth group came to me and said she wanted to have sex with her classmate, I would be able to say as a Christian that we don't support sex before marriage. If her classmate was a female and not a male, this law would prevent me from giving the exact same counsel.
I don't think it's the right of government to tell me what I should be able to teach my youth group when it comes to what our faith teaches.
Noon
Bloc
Rhéal Fortin Bloc Rivière-du-Nord, QC
Okay.
So it is a matter of influence, if I have understood correctly. I am trying to reconcile all this.
It would not be acceptable for anyone—be it a pastor, a psychologist or a neighbour—to try to influence an individual. For example, when it comes to gender identity, they don't want someone telling a little boy that he is not allowed to wear a dress and that he must dress as a boy. However, an objective discussion where a little boy was asked why he is wearing a dress is something that should be allowed.
Did I understand correctly, Mr. Ruba?