Thank you, Madam Chair, and to our three ministers for being here today on this important piece of legislation.
Minister Hajdu mentioned that the Truchon decision created the need for a two-track system with regard to assisted dying. In fact, nothing could be further from the truth, which leads me to my question.
It was the failure of this government to defend its own legislation, legislation that it passed as a majority Liberal parliament in June 2016. Just three short years later, when this legislation was challenged in a lower court, instead of appealing as we called on them to do, instead of appealing as the disability community called on them to do, this government chose at the first possible opportunity to in fact not defend its own legislation. There were numerous organizations that raised alarm bells over the expansion of MAID last year in response to this Quebec Superior Court decision,
We've all had the opportunity to hear from many in the disability community—those who are most vulnerable in our society—and the message that this legislation sends, that you no longer need to be dying to access assisted dying, is a fundamental change in our country.
A letter was sent to the offices of Minister Lametti and Minister Qualtrough. It was signed by 72 organizations across our country that assist Canadians with disabilities. They do honourable work helping those who are most vulnerable. They wrote that a failure to appeal the decision would be a failure “on the part of your government to defend persons with disabilities from significant and tangible harm.”
We know that the bill before us strips away many safeguards that it's not even required to do under the Truchon decision. So my first question to Minister Lametti is why didn't your government take the concerns raised by these organizations that help Canadians with disabilities when deciding not to appeal this lower court decision? It is the job of the Attorney General and it's the job of a government to defend its own legislation.
Thank you.