House of Commons Hansard #20 of the 42nd Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament's site.) The word of the day was movement.

Topics

Opposition Motion—IsraelBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

6 p.m.

Conservative

Kellie Leitch Conservative Simcoe—Grey, ON

Mr. Speaker, as my colleagues on this side of the House have suggested with this important motion rejecting the boycott, divestment, and sanctions movement, there are few key points here, as my colleague from Ancaster also pointed out. Israel is our friend and the BDS movement is nothing but a thinly veiled anti-Semitism movement. We know that our closest values are the ones that our closest friends share.

As my colleague from the opposite side said, we do need to move toward dialogues that are about peace and being constructive, and not divisive, and encouraging others across this globe to be Canadian and to focus on ensuring that we have free and open democracies that allow that free and open dialogue.

As the member opposite mentioned, he will be supporting this motion to reject the boycott, divestment, and sanctions movement. Why is he passionate about this, and what should Canadians be doing to encourage others to reject this movement that is so rooted in anti-Semitism, to ensure that all Canadians are open-minded and focused on looking forward?

Opposition Motion—IsraelBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

6 p.m.

Liberal

Sean Casey Liberal Charlottetown, PE

Mr. Speaker, there are two parts to my hon. colleague's question. First, why does this matter to me in particular and, second, what should Canadians be doing?

I got into politics because of the importance of Canadian values and my firm belief back in 2011 that the country was on the wrong track. I do not mean to make this a divisive issue, but I feel very strongly about the rights that are enshrined in the Charter of Rights and Freedoms. That is really at the core of Canadian values. That, quite frankly, is at the core of this motion.

The real key for Canadians here, as stated by my colleague from Winnipeg North, is very much education. BDS has to be singled out for what it is, and not for what it purports to be. The more that message is disseminated on university campuses by members of Parliament, in civil society, and in academia, the better the prospects for understanding and support of a peaceful two-state solution and a peaceful process leading to that.

Opposition Motion—IsraelBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

6:05 p.m.

NDP

Nathan Cullen NDP Skeena—Bulkley Valley, BC

Mr. Speaker, I do not think my friend and I have had an opportunity yet to engage in the House and I congratulate him on his return to this place.

The Conservatives may be accused of having no sense of irony whatsoever. For instance, I have heard the Conservatives say all day that they do not want to be divisive and do not want to limit speech. This is the same party that when in government practised nothing but divisiveness and wedge politics. It brought in legislation like Bill C-51, which very clearly went after freedom of speech and the charter that Canadians hold so proudly and that my friend referenced so recently.

I have a very specific question for my friend. We find things that we do not agree with all the time as legislators. We see movements come and policies brought forward by constituents or groups around the country that we do not agree with, yet we agree with the principle of allowing them to have that freedom of speech. That is the basis of this place we call Parliament, the place where we speak not the place where we ban speaking. That would be a different word and a different place.

My question is this. Does the member or his government allow for this idea? I am a strong supporter of Israel and I am strongly in support of Israel in that when the Israeli government does something wrong and antithetical to the peace movement I think it is okay to criticize it, just like our governments are criticized around the world. To criticize a government is not to be anti-Semitic. I know this because the Israeli media and the activists in Israel routinely criticize the government. That certainly is not anti-Semitic. Does he draw that same connection that some of my Conservative colleagues so treacherously attempt to do?

Opposition Motion—IsraelBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

6:05 p.m.

Liberal

Sean Casey Liberal Charlottetown, PE

Mr. Speaker, what we have here in the BDS movement really is a wolf in sheep's clothing, and the veneer is extremely thin. The member makes extremely valid points with respect to freedom of expression. He makes extremely valid points with respect to the right to be able to criticize a government. Indeed, the Government of Israel and the Government of Canada share his view that a critique of the government is entirely fair game. However, when a movement gets to the point where Canadian students feel unsafe on their campus it has gone too far, it has gone beyond free speech. That is what we are dealing with here. It is more than free speech, it is worse than free speech, and it needs to be condemned.

Opposition Motion—IsraelBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

6:05 p.m.

Liberal

Judy Sgro Liberal Humber River—Black Creek, ON

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to stand today and voice my concern along with my colleagues about this terrible organization and what it is trying to do to destroy everything we have all worked very hard to build up.

Unfortunately, discrimination, racism, and anti-Semitism remain serious issues that affect all societies to different degrees. Anti-Semitism can take different forms, and Canada continues to oppose its many iterations.

The working definition of anti-Semitism, as defined by the European Monitoring Centre for Racism and Xenophobia, is “a certain perception of Jews, which may be expressed as hatred toward Jews. Rhetorical and physical manifestations of antisemitism are directed toward Jewish or non-Jewish individuals and/or their property, toward Jewish community institutions and religious facilities.”

In recent years, the world has continued to witness contemporary forms of anti-Semitism in the denial by some states and individuals that call for aid and justify the killing or harming of Jews. They also make dehumanizing or stereotypical allegations about Jews as such, or the power of Jews as a collective, especially, but not exclusively, the myth about a world Jewish conspiracy, or of Jews controlling the media, the economy, government, or other societal institutions; accusing Jews as a collective of being responsible for real or imagined wrongdoing committed by a single Jewish person or group or the State of Israel; accusing the Jews as a people, or Israel as a state, of inventing or exaggerating the Holocaust.

Other forms of anti-Semitism would deny Israel's right to exist, its right to defend itself, and the right of Jews to undertake Aliyah and immigrate to Israel.

While it is fair to criticize Israel for the action of its government in the context of open and fair debate, as any other government may be criticized, it is not fair, in fact it is anti-Semitic, to deny Israel's right to exist.

It is evident that new forms of anti-Semitism are being revealed alongside older iterations in many countries where Jews, Jewish businesses, synagogues, and Jewish institutions continue to come under attack. This can often occur in violent form, as we have witnessed in the attacks against the Jewish Museum in Brussels, in May 2014, and the attack against the Great Synagogue in Copenhagen just over a year ago.

In fact, a 2015 study by the widely respected Pew Research Centre reported that there has been a marked increase in the number of countries where members of the Jewish community were harassed. In 2013, the harassment of Jews, either by government or social groups, was found in 39% of countries, which was a seven year high.

Discrimination and intolerance causes suffering, spreads division, and contributes to a climate of fear and stigmatization. Anti-Semitism, given its long history, is a particularly pernicious and chronic form of discrimination. Actions motivated by intolerance have no place in any country and are in opposition to values that we in this House hold so dear, such as pluralism, diversity, and inclusion. Canada supports efforts to combat all forms of racism and discrimination.

However, the Government of Canada understands that hatred can manifest itself in specific forms that requires differing degrees of responses.

Anti-Semitism is indicative of a unique form of racism, one whose extreme manifestations has led to some of the darkest hours in the history of humankind. In January 27, 2016, all parties in this House remembered the atrocities and crimes against humanity committed against the Jewish people during the Holocaust.

As we commemorate International Holocaust Remembrance Day, and as the Minister of Foreign Affairs indicated in his statement on January 27, we must remember the six million Jews and millions of other victims of the Holocaust, and we must be ever mindful of the dangers of anti-Semitism and intolerance that continues to persist in this world today.

Opposition Motion—IsraelBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

6:10 p.m.

Liberal

The Assistant Deputy Speaker Liberal Anthony Rota

It being 6:15 p.m. pursuant to an order made earlier today, all questions necessary to dispose of the opposition motion are deemed put and a recorded division deemed requested and deferred until Monday, February 22, at the expiry of the time provided for oral questions.

Opposition Motion—IsraelBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

6:15 p.m.

Liberal

Arnold Chan Liberal Scarborough—Agincourt, ON

Mr. Speaker, if you check, I believe you will find unanimous consent of the House to see the clock at 6:30 p.m.

Opposition Motion—IsraelBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

6:15 p.m.

Liberal

The Assistant Deputy Speaker Liberal Anthony Rota

Is it agreed?

Opposition Motion—IsraelBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

6:15 p.m.

Some hon. members

Agreed.

A motion to adjourn the House under Standing Order 38 deemed to have been moved.

Indigenous AffairsAdjournment Proceedings

6:15 p.m.

Conservative

Cathy McLeod Conservative Kamloops—Thompson—Cariboo, BC

Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the opportunity to rise in the House today and follow up on my questions of January 29 and February 2.

During question period on those days, I asked the Minister of Indigenous and Northern Affairs why her government had decided to ignore the compliance measures of the First Nations Financial Transparency Act. The minister and the parliamentary secretary both failed to answer my question.

As the opposition critic for indigenous affairs, I continue to be appalled by the Liberal government's decision to abandon transparency when it comes to financial matters for indigenous Canadians.

The Conservatives supported this legislation because it is based on the premise that all Canadians deserve accountability and transparency from their leadership.

For all practical purposes, on a dark day right before Christmas, on a Friday, when no one was watching, before the holidays, the Liberal government effectively repealed the act without bothering to give members of Parliament a chance to debate it. It is ironic that a law about transparency was gutted in such a non-transparent way. The government is functionally abandoning the transparency act without repealing it.

Furthermore, the act was working. Nearly 94% of first nations chiefs and councils complied, and 543 bands made their expenses and salaries public to their band members. For many of them, it was the first time they ever had that kind of information. Now, with no compliance measures in effect, it is a safe prediction that compliance rates will collapse and financial information will again be shrouded in secrecy from band members. Transparency means having readily available, accessible information. As I said, it does not mean having a report sitting in a basement in Ottawa.

On December 21, an editorial in the Toronto Star asked the right questions. Without compliance measures:

...how will the rights of band members to see fiscal statements and salaries be guaranteed, going forward? How this will result in “real accountability....

These are questions the minister needs to answer. Band members should not be left in the dark.

I ask the Minister of Indigenous and Northern Affairs how she can explain to indigenous Canadians that the Liberal government's commitment to transparency is empty rhetoric. Why are the Liberals telling band members that they have to go to court to get basic information that is available to all other levels of government?

Indigenous AffairsAdjournment Proceedings

6:15 p.m.

Labrador Newfoundland & Labrador

Liberal

Yvonne Jones LiberalParliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Indigenous and Northern Affairs

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to rise this evening in response to the question posed by the member for Kamloops—Thompson—Cariboo. She posed this question previously in the House of Commons, and we have responded to it. However, I will attempt to clarify again for the hon. member opposite.

Everyone, including first nations, wanted increased transparency and accountability; however, they do want to do it in collaboration with government. They do not want a talk-down approach that tells them what they can do, when they can do it, and how they should do it.

We realize, we accept, and we are very much in favour of transparency and accountability. We know it is paramount to the government. We also know that, whether it is municipal, provincial, federal, or first nations, this has to be an important piece of accountability to government.

Indigenous AffairsAdjournment Proceedings

6:20 p.m.

Conservative

Cathy McLeod Conservative Kamloops—Thompson—Cariboo, BC

Mr. Speaker, I think we have to look at this—

Indigenous AffairsAdjournment Proceedings

6:20 p.m.

Liberal

The Assistant Deputy Speaker Liberal Anthony Rota

Order please. There was a mix-up with the clock. I have been informed by the Table that the hon. Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Indigenous and Northern Affairs has about three minutes left. We have it all straightened out.

Indigenous AffairsAdjournment Proceedings

6:20 p.m.

Liberal

Yvonne Jones Liberal Labrador, NL

Mr. Speaker, I really appreciate your ruling.

As I was saying, transparency and accountability are paramount in any government. It is the same in our government. That has not changed.

However, the Minister of Indigenous and Northern Affairs had been mandated to undertake, along with the Minister of Justice, and in full partnership and consultations with first nations, Inuit, and Métis, a review of laws to ensure that the Crown is fully executing its obligations in accordance with its constitutional and international obligations.

Doing so will take some time. I ask members to recognize that, but we are committed to getting this right. We want to work in full partnership with first nations leadership and organizations on the way forward so that we can improve accountability and transparency. I have said before that top-down solutions have never worked and they are not working in this case.

In fact, last December, Indigenous and Northern Affairs Canada ceased all discretionary measures related to the enforcement of the First Nations Financial Transparency Act and reinstated funding that had been withheld from first nations under these measures. The member opposite talks about it being a dark day. Well was it a dark day for first nations in this country when government allowed reinstated funding to their governments that they should have received in previous years?

Also, I would like to ask the member if it was a dark day when the court actions against the first nations that had not complied with the act were actually suspended? Maybe the member opposite thinks that should not have happened.

These initial steps will enable us to engage in discussions on transparency and accountability that are based on recognition and rights, and that are based on respect, co-operation, and partnership that builds toward a renewed relationship with our indigenous people in this country.

In the meantime, first nations governments will continue their long-standing reporting of their audited consolidated financial statements including chiefs' and councillors' salaries and expenses to Indigenous and Northern Affairs Canada and to their membership.

We are committed to getting this right. Together with our partners we are taking very important steps like the two steps I have just mentioned. That will reinstate funding that has been withheld from first nations under the current measures that were in place. I would ask that the member opposite be supportive of increased funding to first nations at this time.

Indigenous AffairsAdjournment Proceedings

6:20 p.m.

Liberal

The Assistant Deputy Speaker Liberal Anthony Rota

Before we resume, I will explain what happened. We had a little bit of a synchronization problem with our technology. Technology is wonderful when it works. When it does not, it can cause a few problems.

The hon. member for Kamloops—Thompson—Cariboo.

Indigenous AffairsAdjournment Proceedings

6:20 p.m.

Conservative

Cathy McLeod Conservative Kamloops—Thompson—Cariboo, BC

Mr. Speaker, I am absolutely appalled with what I heard from the member in terms of transparency.

The prior situation was that band members would have to go pleading to a band office for information, which they may or may not get. I appreciate that this information gets taken and delivered to the Department of Indigenous and Northern Affairs where it is looked at. That is not about transparency and accountability. This is basic, simple legislation. As a member of Parliament, my constituents know what my expenses are and what I make. The constituents of MLAs know what their expenses are and what they make. The shareholders of a company are very aware of what a company makes.

This is basic transparency. It is appalling that the government is backtracking on a piece of legislation that allowed band members for the first time to easily access important information about how the money was being spent in their communities.

Indigenous AffairsAdjournment Proceedings

6:25 p.m.

Liberal

Yvonne Jones Liberal Labrador, NL

Mr. Speaker, the member opposite is obviously trying to make this look like a process whereby band chiefs and indigenous governments in this country are accountable to no one, and that is wrong. They are accountable, first, to the Government of Canada for the money they are afforded and, second, to their own membership. They do report to their membership. It is available.

I know the members opposite may have trouble understanding this, but what we are doing is working with first nations, Métis, and Inuit governments in this country to be able to develop transparency and accountability regulations collaboratively together, with mutual understanding, so that the regulations are fair to all partners involved, and do not require indigenous Canadians to go to a reporting system that is above and beyond what any other Canadian is expected to do.

The member opposite knows that the act that was in place had measures that certainly asked them to do just that.

Indigenous AffairsAdjournment Proceedings

6:25 p.m.

NDP

Charlie Angus NDP Timmins—James Bay, ON

Mr. Speaker, at the outset, congratulations for being in the chair. I invite you to come to my town of Cobalt any time you want.

We are here tonight to follow up on the question that I raised with the Minister of Health, that on the day it was found that Canada had systemically discriminated against indigenous children for years, Health Canada denied a youngster medically necessary orthodontic surgery at the third stage of appeal.

I am very pleased that the minister, because of the pressure that we raised in the House, is now looking at that case again. I find it shocking that it takes pressure in the House of Commons to deal with children who cases are being denied.

In this child's case, in 2008, she suffered an ocular tumor and was going to lose her eye. She needed special drops. The medical professionals gave her a prescription for the drops, and the bureaucrats at Health Canada said, “Absolutely not”, she could get by with Visine. The family has had to get by on samples from the medical specialists so this child does not lose her eye.

Recently, her orthodontic crisis came to a head, with two pediatric orthodontic specialists stating that if nothing were done, she would lose all her teeth and need special surgery. This was a severe and functionally handicapping malocclusion. She was denied at the first stage. She went to the second stage of appeal and was denied there too. She went to the third stage of appeal and again denied.

What is really disturbing is to have read the criteria, because the government said that she did not meet them. The criteria for the government to accept a case is for that person to have a severe overbite with evident soft tissue injury, two-third overlap with impingement of the palate. I am not a dentist. I do not know what that means, but I know that her orthodontic surgeon said that she had a severe overbite with evidence of two-third deep overbite impingement that would lead to a loss of her teeth. If she is not eligible under the criteria, then who is?

Evidently no one is. I am looking at over 534 cases of children that were brought before Health Canada, and 80% were rejected in the first round. The few that went to the second round had a 99% rejection rate. On the third round, 100% of these children were denied by the bureaucrats at Health Canada. That is what systemic discrimination against these children looks like.

I refer members to the working document of the Officials Working Group, May 20, 2009, on Jordan's principle dispute resolution. It states that when a child has special needs, for example, for a wheelchair, Health Canada will not give an indigenous child a motorized wheelchair, but that the child has to get by with an adult push wheelchair. If the child does not fit that chair, it actually says that they will have to put in some pillows. If they need a special lift because they cannot move or if they need a special wheelchair or a special tracking device, they do not get all three. They can pick one. That is it. This is what systemic discrimination by the government against children has meant.

It is all very well for the kind words we are hearing from the government, but we need to know whether the systemic discrimination is going to end and if Canada will become compliant with the Human Rights Tribunal.

I want to hear, first, will the Liberals immediately stand up in this House and say they will not appeal against Cindy Blackstock?

Second, will they prove to this child and to the country that they are willing to implement the Human Rights Tribunal?

Third, how are we going to deal with the 500, the 1,000-plus children, and all the other children who are being systematically denied day after day by the government?

Indigenous AffairsAdjournment Proceedings

6:30 p.m.

Brampton West Ontario

Liberal

Kamal Khera LiberalParliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Health

Mr. Speaker, our government is fully committed to ensuring that first nation and Inuit children have access to the health services they need. Our government is committed to working with our partners to provide effective, sustainable, and culturally-appropriate health programs and services to improve the health of first nations and Inuit people in Canada.

I know with the leadership of the Minister of Health and the Minister of Indigenous and Northern Affairs, we will continue to build relationships with first nation, Inuit, and Métis communities around Canada to work in partnership with them on their concerns and priorities.

Health Canada's non-insured health benefits program is a health benefit program that provides coverage for medically necessary health-related goods and services not otherwise provided by the provinces. Benefits include prescription drugs, dental care, vision care, medical supplies and equipment, mental health counselling, and medical transportation where health services are not available in communities.

NIHP is one of the largest health benefit programs in the country, supporting approximately 824,000 eligible first nations and Inuits, with expenditures last year of over $1 billion. All benefits are provided without a co-payment or deductible to all eligible first nations and Inuit. Like any other publicly-funded health benefit program, this program makes coverage decisions based on current scientific and clinical evidence.

Specifically on dental care, the program provides eligible first nations and Inuit with coverage for dental benefits, including diagnostic, preventive, restorative, endodontic, periodontal, removable prosthodontics, oral surgery, orthodontic and other services. Last year, the program processed approximately 2.5 million dental claims for 290,000 first nation and Inuit clients, supported with over $200 million in funding.

Orthodontic services are covered when they are needed because a person's ability to chew is adversely affected. There are clear criteria and guidelines in place, and these are always followed.

As hon. members of the House are aware, not all Canadians have access to insured dental health care services. We know the importance of oral health in contributing to the overall health of first nations and Inuit, and this program does cover a broad range of dental services in an effort to address the oral health needs of first nation and Inuit populations through NIHB programs.

Unlike private plans, the NIHB program will cover, for most cases, the full cost of orthodontic treatment that meet program criteria. In the majority of the provinces and territories, the program pays more than $6,000 per case. This represents about three times more than what a private plan would cover per client.

I am not able to comment on the details related to a specific case in order to protect patient confidentiality, but our government continues to work with first nation and Inuit partners to enhance access to non-insured health benefits for first nations and Inuit.

For instance, in partnership with the Assembly of First Nations, Health Canada has begun a joint review of the NIHB program in the spirit of continual improvement of the program. This two-year review will enable direct input from first nations. Each NIHB benefit area will be examined, with a view to identifying and addressing gaps and streamlining service delivery.

We know that there is always more to do. We are committed to delivering the best possible health care services to first nation and Inuit communities.

I appreciate the question from the member opposite, and value his commitment to representing and advocating for his constituents.

Indigenous AffairsAdjournment Proceedings

6:30 p.m.

NDP

Charlie Angus NDP Timmins—James Bay, ON

Mr. Speaker, I am absolutely appalled. We are talking about whether Canada is in compliance with a human rights tribunal ruling that has gone around the world for systemic discrimination against children. However, what I am hearing from that member makes it sound as if these children are getting a better deal than ordinary white Canadians, that they are getting access to services that other kids would not get, and that maybe there is more to do.

Yes, there is more to do. If the member read the internal documents, they routinely deny emergency medical treatments. If the Liberals look at the documents, there is a 100% refusal rate at level 3. Is there more to do? Yes, there is more to do.

It is about being in compliance with the legally binding rules. I did not hear one word about whether the member's government will meet the obligations that have been laid down by the human rights tribunal to stop this systemic discrimination against these children that is endemic within Health Canada. It is a legally binding ruling.

I would have liked to have heard, “Yes, we will respect that ruling, and yes, we will make sure that discrimination stops”, but I did not hear any of that. I heard more pointed talk and blather.

Indigenous AffairsAdjournment Proceedings

6:35 p.m.

Liberal

Kamal Khera Liberal Brampton West, ON

Mr. Speaker, I am happy to have this interaction today and to speak to the importance of first nations and Inuit children having access to the health services they need.

As I said previously, yes, we know there is more that can be done, and we will do more. First nation children must have access to the health services they need, including the provision of orthodontic services through Health Canada's NIHB program.

The joint review of the NIHB program currently being undertaken with the Assembly of First Nations will be an important part of this work. The review will enable direct input from first nations and Inuit in the spirit of continual improvement of the program.

We will continue to work with partners to provide effective, sustainable, and culturally appropriate health programs and services to improve the health of first nations and Inuit people in Canada.

Indigenous AffairsAdjournment Proceedings

6:35 p.m.

Liberal

The Assistant Deputy Speaker Liberal Anthony Rota

The motion to adjourn the House is now deemed to have been adopted. Accordingly, this House stands adjourned until tomorrow at 10 a.m., pursuant to Standing Order 24(1).

(The House adjourned at 6:35 p.m.)