Debates of Nov. 23rd, 2017

National Impaired Driving Prevention Week

[Murray Rankin, NDP, Victoria, BC]

Madam Speaker, I rise today to offer my support and congratulations to the member for Saint-Léonard—Saint-Michel for bringing this important initiative before the House of Commons. We will be supporting it enthusiastically.

I understand as well that the motion touches on issues that are quite personal for the member and his family, and I join with the member for Brandon—Souris in expressing my sympathy and solidarity with my colleague.

It is certainly my aim to support all measures that reduce the number of impaired driving accidents in Canada and by doing so, spare families the considerable pain and needless difficulties my hon. colleague and his family endured. Frankly, I would be quite surprised if any of my colleagues in the House would not support the motion. I would hope that despite our political differences, we are all united in our desire for the safety of Canadians.

With respect to criminal justice matters, the NDP supports preventative measures. If we can eliminate behaviours, such as impaired driving that precipitates such terrible outcomes, we can save lives and alleviate the heavy burden on our justice system as well.

Furthermore, I would suggest that awareness campaigns target young people before they are old enough to drive. We must instill in young Canadians the knowledge that impaired driving is extremely dangerous and can have dire consequences. We must teach our youth that it is selfish, reckless, anti-social, and immoral to take these risks with the lives of other Canadians. The sooner Canadians of all ages fully understand the devastating impacts of all forms of impaired driving the faster we can reduce the number of these senseless deaths and injuries.

We have seen that awareness campaigns work. Rates of drinking and driving have gone down significantly since such campaigns were launched. According to Stats Canada data, in 2015, the rate of impaired driving was 201 incidents per 100,000 population. That was the lowest rate since data on impaired driving was first collected in 1986, 4% lower than in 2014. Clearly, we are moving in the right direction.

However, in spite of a decline in impaired driving rates over the past 30 years, impaired driving remains one of the most frequent criminal offences and is among the leading criminal causes of death in Canada.

We have made significant strides forward, but alcohol-impaired driving remains a serious issue in our country. The U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention reported that Canada had the highest percentage of alcohol-related crash deaths among the 20 high-income countries of the OECD in 2013. This reckless behaviour is unacceptable, given our knowledge about its detrimental effects. One death or serious injury caused by alcohol-impaired driving is one too many.

I had the opportunity, as a member of justice committee, to hear testimony from experts, like Dr. Robert Solomon, during its consideration of Bill C-46. The bill would allow police to administer what are called “mandatory alcohol screening” measures as a way to apprehend all drivers at the stop who are impaired. The bill would allow officers to test every driver at a stop, instead of relying on their subjective discretion, as is currently the case. More people are going to get caught and more people are going to be frightened about being caught. We hope as a result the level of deaths and injuries will go down.

The evidence is unassailable if we look at the European countries. As Dr. Solomon pointed out, this kind of testing will lead to less carnage and mayhem on our roads and highways. He said that when Switzerland enacted mandatory alcohol screening in 2005, the percentage of drivers testing positive for alcohol fell from about 25% to 7.6%. Alcohol-related crash deaths dropped by approximately 25%.

Therefore, along with adopting these sorts of effective practices, we must certainly continue our education campaigns and commitment to support police officers in their work to eliminate alcohol-impaired driving from coast to coast to coast.

I also now want to talk about the misinformation that exists around drug-impaired driving, particularly among Canadian youth. This is very troubling. We all talk about the dangers of impaired driving as if everyone knows it and it is well acknowledged, but there is a lack of awareness about drug-impaired driving among young Canadians, who are still the leading demographic for impaired driving.

It is imperative we take the necessary precautions to ensure Canadians have accurate information. In order to ensure safety, we have to address the misconceptions among young people and some parents that driving stoned, driving under the influence of cannabis, is somehow safer than driving under the influence of alcohol. An alarming percentage of youth actually do not think drugs impair their ability to drive, which of course is categorically false.

A document published by the Canadian Centre on Substance Abuse and Addiction addresses this persistent misconception head on. Here is what it says:

The challenge is many youth do not consider driving under the influence of marijuana to be risky, unlike driving under the influence of alcohol. Some youth even believe that using marijuana makes them better drivers, but evidence clearly shows that it impairs driving ability.... [M]ore awareness campaigns that centre on youth are needed to deter them from driving while impaired, especially after using marijuana.

The idea that somehow driving stoned is going make someone a better driver is out there and it is a very dangerous idea, so one hopes the government will take the necessary educational measures to increase awareness of this problem.

Nearly one-third of teens do not consider driving under the influence of cannabis to be as bad as driving under the influence of alcohol. That comes from a national study by Partnership for a Drug-Free Canada.

Nearly 25% of parents of teenagers did not consider driving while high on cannabis to be as bad as drinking and driving.

I hope that, by dedicating the third week of March as national impaired driving prevention week, we can reach primarily young people. The timing coincides nicely with spring break in most provinces, and a little reminder about impaired driving at that time is obviously a good thing.

In addition to discussions around alcohol and drug impairment, I understand that Bill C-373 has been brought forward to address distracted driving. According to researchers Robertson, Bowman, and Charles: “In some provinces, distracted driving has reportedly been the cause of even more car accidents than impaired driving.”

With the exception of Nunavut, all provinces and territories currently have their own laws on distracted driving. Ultimately, it is up to the provincial jurisdiction to determine how we are going to implement these laws.

I wish to reiterate, in conclusion, that the NDP is entirely supportive of measures that prevent tragedies that result from impaired driving. If we can educate Canadians about the extreme dangers of all forms of impaired driving, we can reduce the number of people who are doing this and avoid future tragedies for Canadians.

[Nick Whalen, Liberal, St. John's East, NL]

Madam Speaker, I am pleased to rise in the House today to speak to the motion put forward by the hon. member for Saint-Léonard—Saint-Michel. With the holiday season almost upon us, our discussion today is very timely. The holidays are a time of year when people get together to celebrate with family and friends, but there is, of course, a cloud to that silver lining: an increased likelihood of impaired driving incidents following the celebrations.

A number of public education awareness campaigns are in full swing this time of year. They encourage Canadians to drive sober or offer drivers alternative ways to get home safely. One of them, as we have heard already, MADD Canada's project red ribbon, is marking its 30th anniversary this year. Together, these efforts have had a powerful and positive impact. According to MADD Canada's estimates, between 1982 and 2010 nearly 36,650 lives were saved in Canada due to reductions in alcohol-related fatal crashes. That is something for which we can all be very thankful.

However, despite the progress we have made as a society, impaired driving remains a very serious problem in our country. People who are in no shape to drive continue to get behind the wheel. Some choose to drive after getting high or having too much to drink, but as this motion suggests, impaired driving is not limited to drugs or alcohol. Motorists who are too tired to drive are also impaired and can cause just as much damage as drivers who are drunk or high. The same can be said for distracted drivers, including those who text behind the wheel.

Impaired drivers of all kinds not only put their own lives at risk but endanger the lives of their passengers and everyone else around them. In fact, impaired driving remains the leading criminal cause of death in Canada—anti-social criminal decisions leaving thousands of Canadians dead or seriously injured each year. What makes this carnage on our roads all the more senseless is how easily these deaths could have been prevented. The risks are well known. The risks have been known for decades. The risks are common sense. Today, we would be hard pressed to find someone who would deny the dangers of drunk driving.

Sadly, it is a somewhat different story when it comes to drugs. Drug-impaired driving is actually on the rise. Almost 3,100 incidents of drug-impaired driving were reported by police last year, 343 more than the previous year. Overall, the rate of drug-impaired driving increased by 11%. According to the Canadian Centre on Substance Use and Addiction, 40% of drivers who die in vehicle crashes test positive for drugs. By comparison, 33.3% test positive for alcohol. Figures like these show how crucial it is to get out the message about the risks and consequences of impaired driving, including driving under the influence of cannabis.

As we know, this past spring the Government of Canada introduced Bill C-45. Its overarching goal is to protect the health and safety of Canadians, keep cannabis out of the hands of youth, and prevent criminals from profiting from its production and sale. The bill proposes tough new measures to severely punish anyone who sells or supplies cannabis to young Canadians. That includes two new criminal offences with maximum penalties of 14 years in prison for those who sell or provide cannabis to anyone under the age of 18. These proposed measures complement a public education and awareness campaign informing Canadians, especially Canadian youth, about cannabis and its risks.

Budget 2017 directed an initial investment of $9.6 million for public education and awareness on this topic. The public education campaign has begun and will continue over the next five years, because there is an immediate and continuing need to set the record straight on a number of issues related to cannabis. The funds will also be used to monitor the trends and perceptions of cannabis use among Canadians, especially youth. Too many people are under the delusion that cannabis does no harm, which is completely false. Cannabis presents definite health risks.

Another myth centres on a person's ability to drive after consuming cannabis. We know that young people who test positive for drugs, alcohol, or both continue to be the largest group of drivers killed in motor vehicle crashes. However, when it comes to cannabis, research shows that many Canadians, including youth, do not take the risks seriously. According to an EKOS study conducted for Health Canada last year, 27% of Canadians have driven a vehicle while under the influence of cannabis. More than one-third of Canadians also reported that they had been passengers in vehicles driven by someone under the influence of cannabis. That number jumps to 42% among young adults and 70% among recent cannabis users.

The results of a national study conducted by the Partnership for a Drug Free Canada can help to explain these findings. It found that almost one-third of teens do not consider driving under the influence of cannabis to be as bad as doing so under the influence of alcohol. In addition, just over a quarter of Canadian young adults between the ages of 18 and 24 believe that a driver is either the same or, sadly, better on the road while under the influence of cannabis.

The reality paints a far different and more gruesome picture. Among all drivers killed in motor vehicle crashes in Canada between 2000 and 2010, 16.4% tested positive for cannabis, which is one in six.

It is clear that a large percentage of Canadians downplay or even flat out disbelieve the fact that cannabis impairs your ability to drive safely. That is one reason why Bill C-46 is such an important piece of legislation as a complement to Bill C-45.

Bill C-46 would strengthen Canada's laws to enforce a strict approach for those who drive under the influence of alcohol or drugs, including cannabis. Among other provisions, it would create new criminal offences for drug-impaired driving, and authorize new tools to allow police to detect drivers who have drugs in their system.

In September, the government announced up to $274.5 million in funding to support the provisions of the bill. Up to $161 million of that funding is earmarked for building law enforcement capacity across the country. It will help law enforcement and border officials detect and deter drug-impaired driving, and enforce the cannabis legislation and regulations. That includes training additional front-line officers in how to recognize the signs and symptoms of drug-impaired driving, and providing them with access to drug screening devices. It also includes funding to raise public awareness about the dangers of drug-impaired driving.

As announced last month, the Government of Canada is joining forces with Young Drivers of Canada to spread that important message. The project will involve the airing of public service announcements over the next year. Public Safety Canada and Young Drivers of Canada will also work together to share material through Facebook, Twitter, and other social media channels.

I think all of us in this House can agree that impaired driving is a serious problem in Canada. Awareness weeks like the one proposed by my colleague are another tool that we can use to foster good habits, recognize the dangers of impairment, and even to recognize impairment itself, because there seems to be some misconception about that, and to have safer roads and save lives.

I will be supporting this motion and I encourage my colleagues in the House to do the same.

[Jamie Schmale, Conservative, Haliburton—Kawartha Lakes—Brock, ON]

Madam Speaker, I rise today to speak in support of Motion No. 148, which reads:

That, in the opinion of the House, the government should recognize the importance of educating Canadians about the consequences of impaired driving due to alcohol, drugs, fatigue or distraction, which, each year, destroys the lives and health of thousands of Canadians, by designating the third week of March, each year, National Impaired Driving Prevention Week.

This is a very timely and important issue that I believe all my colleagues in this House should be seized of, and I thank the Liberal member for Saint-Léonard—Saint-Michel for his dedication to this matter, and diligence in bringing this motion to the House.

For a long time, we have known about the consequences of drinking and driving, thanks to advocates like MADD Canada, and police and community initiatives. Drunk drivers have now become the pariahs of society, and rightfully so.

Statistics suggest the efforts made in the fight against impaired driving have saved 30,589 Canadian lives since 1982. Despite this number of lives saved, Transport Canada reports there has been a total of 39,487 alcohol-related fatalities on Canadian roads since 1982.

Impaired driving was the leading cause of driving injuries and deaths in Canada up until a few short years ago. In the fall of 2009, a milestone in human history occurred and slipped by almost unnoticed. For the first time, cell phones around the world were exchanging more data than phone calls. The preference for texting and emailing on cell phones has risen steadily, year by year, since 2009. Alongside this rise, so too has the incidence of injuries and deaths from distracted driving.

The message is clear. In my home province of Ontario, one person is injured or killed in a distracted driving collision every 30 minutes. Drivers who use hand-held devices are four times more likely to get into crashes that are serious enough to cause injury. Even when drivers use hands-free devices, they are less aware of the traffic around them. They tend to react more slowly, and in fact may not detect the danger at all, failing to see up to 50% of the information in their driving environment.

Drivers who text are 23 times more likely to be involved in a crash. Distracted driving is now the number one risk on Canadian roads, with distraction being a contributing factor in 93% of rear-end collisions. A study found that in 80% of collisions, the driver had looked away from the road three seconds prior to the crash. At 90 kilometres an hour, checking a text for five seconds means that a driver will have travelled the length of a football field blindfolded.

Distraction is a factor in about four million motor vehicle collisions in North America every year, including in 10% of fatal crashes, 18% of injury crashes, and 16% of all police reported motor vehicle traffic crashes. Almost half of all people killed in collisions where a teenager was distracted were teenagers themselves. No text, no tweet, no call, no post is worth a life.

In my riding, on October 24, the Ministry of Natural Resources and Forestry held an enforcement blitz on Highway 35, just north of Norland, in the city of Kawartha Lakes. Conservation officers said the road check focused primarily on moose hunters travelling back from their camps in the Minden and Bancroft areas. Numerous drivers throughout the evening failed to stop even though officers were holding stop signs, were wearing reflective gear, and had two vehicles with emergency lights flashing. One driver blamed their dog as the distraction, while another, completely oblivious, slammed on the brakes at the last minute and skidded right by the officers.

It takes just a few seconds of distraction to kill a father, mother, aunt, or uncle working on the side of the road. Earlier this month at the end of a province-wide campaign, Vancouver police were astounded after pulling over a driver with a tablet and phone taped to their steering wheel. During the campaign Vancouver Police issued nearly 2,000 distracted driving tickets in one month.

Since the beginning of January, Montreal police have handed out more than 10,000 citations to motorists for using their cell phones while driving. According to police, distracted driving remains the number one cause of collisions on roads in Quebec. From 2012 to 2016, 32.9% of fatal crashes and 41.7% of collisions leading to serious injuries in Quebec were linked to distracted driving.

In Edmonton, distracted driving infractions were up nearly 60% in the first quarter of this year.

In Saskatchewan, during the first two months of the year, distracted driving charges were up a staggering 197% over the same period in 2016. The year before, 5,700 collisions were linked to distracted driving, resulting in 36 deaths, over 800 injuries, and thousands of families in Saskatchewan whose lives have forever been changed.

Last year more than 140 Nova Scotians were killed or involved in serious collisions due to distracted driving.

In my home province of Ontario, it is much the same. The Ontario Provincial Police have said that in its jurisdiction, car crashes caused by distracted driving have come to outnumber those caused by intoxication or speeding. As of September, 1,158 collisions were due to drunk drivers, 4,700 were due to speeding, and just fewer than 6,400 were due to distracted driving.

Tragically, deaths related to this driving epidemic are on the rise. As of Aug. 28, 47 people had died because of distracted driving, which is a 16% increase compared to the same time last year. Another 26 lives were taken by distracted drivers before the close of 2016, making it the fourth year in a row that distracted driving led to the highest number of deaths on OPP-controlled roads.

Over the summer, Ontario highways have been the stage for a series of horrific and deadly vehicle accidents due to distracted driving. On May 11, four people died and two others were seriously injured in a seven-vehicle pileup on Highway 401 east of Kingston, Ontario. The driver of a transport truck approached a construction zone and failed to stop, crashing into vehicles at the end of the traffic queue. The impact was such that a vehicle was crushed and became engulfed in flames, killing the family trapped inside.

On July 27, in Georgina, on Highway 48, not too far from my riding, a dump truck hauling gravel collided with five vehicles, having failed to slow down for stopped traffic. Two died at the scene, and two others, including a 10-year-old boy, were airlifted with critical injuries.

Three days later, on July 30, in Chatham, a six-vehicle crash killed a mother and her son and seriously injured several others when a transport truck hit their trailer from behind, crushing it. The truck then mounted their pickup and pushed them down the road and into five other vehicles before stopping. The driver of the truck was not paying attention and did not even see the stopped traffic. The family was on their way home from a camping trip.

Just this past Halloween night, a chain reaction of collisions caused a 14-vehicle pileup that killed three people and left Highway 400, about an hour north of Toronto, littered with tangled, twisted metal and a series of explosions that melted the vehicles right to the asphalt. While the investigation is ongoing, driver distraction is the leading theory for this incident.

In another incident, which I fear will not be the last, a native of my town of Lindsay, Robert Griffioen, while visiting family in Oklahoma City, in the United States, was out for a run on August 20. He was killed instantly by a teenager who fell asleep going 80 kilometres per hour through a red light. Robert grew up in Lindsay and attended Heritage Christian School and St. Thomas Aquinas Catholic Secondary School. He loved sports, especially running. He was also an army cadet and a reservist. He loved his community and he loved his country. He leaves behind a grieving widow and a 5-year-old son who miss him each and every day.

The time is now. We cannot wait any longer. We need to raise awareness. We need to get this message out. Distracted driving kills. It maims. It destroys lives and tears families apart.

Next year on Canada Day, though, 220 days from now, the government intends to legalize marijuana. This raises some very serious concerns for Canadians from coast to coast and the police officers sworn to protect them. The irony is that this motion is raised by a member of the same government bent on speeding up legalization before the guidelines and the public education are in place. I do not really understand it. We need to make our roads safer, not more dangerous, and we need to do that now. We all know that education is the key.

I am pleased to take a stand and commit my support for this motion against distracted driving.

[Kevin Lamoureux, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the Leader of the Government in the House of Commons]

Madam Speaker, what a pleasure it is to speak to this very important motion introduced to the chamber by my friend and colleague, the member for Saint-Léonard—Saint-Michel.

I appreciate the fact that the member's daughter is here. I think his daughter is very proud of her dad and dad is very proud of his miracle child. It is always nice to get that personal story.

Listening to what other members across the way are saying about the motion suggests that my friend has taken this issue and captured the imagination of the House of Commons. He is doing a fantastic job representing his constituents by identifying an issue that has obviously touched the lives of so many Canadians in all regions of our country, and for that the member, my colleague and friend, should be applauded.

It is not too often that we get an opportunity to have motions such as this debated in the chamber. In four years, there may be 150 or 155 submitted, and a much small number will actually pass the House. However, listening to members, I am hopeful we will see this motion pass. I understand Mothers Against Drunk Driving, MADD, is behind the motion as well. so expect it will pass.

I am looking forward to the motion passing the next time is comes before us, which will likely be some time in February. The motion would designate the third week of March each year as national impaired driving week. In that sense, the timing is perfect. However, I would challenge members on all sides of the House, as we show our support for the this, that we think about December, which is one of those months where people are inclined to drink and drive. We have seen so much progress over the last number of years, but we could give that extra push this December by reflecting on the debate we have heard tonight.

It was not only touching to hear my colleague and friend speak, but also my colleagues in the Conservative Party and the New Democratic Party who spoke from their personal perspectives. That is important. A lot of effort has been put forward from a range of individuals and from organizations such as MADD, which has been doing some fine work.

However, I would like to bring this to some of our schools. When I graduated high school, we did not have the “Safe Grad” concept. We have gone so much further. One of my colleagues made reference to a time when there was a fine for drinking and driving, and it was fairly basic even if there was an accident. Look how far we have come.

When I was in high school, drinking and driving was not necessarily frowned upon. Today, it is not only frowned upon, but it is a major issue with respect to graduations. I think of Sisler High School, Maples Collegiate, Children of the Earth, R.B. Russell, and St. John's High School. Young people have taken this issue on, ensuring, as much as possible, that there is a very strong educational component to this. We need to realize the victims and the harm this has caused to society. We have heard about this in the speeches this evening.

[The Assistant Deputy Speaker, NDP, Carol Hughes]

I apologize, but the member will have a little over five minutes the next time this matter is before the House.

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

Status of Women

[Sheila Malcolmson, NDP, Nanaimo—Ladysmith, BC]

Madam Speaker, I note the issue we are taking up tonight is a great concern for the NDP members on this side of the House about violence against women. The particular focus of the original question was around women in the Northwest Territories. They experience nine times the national rate of violence against women. Eighty per cent have no access to victims services, 85% have no violence-against-women shelter that they can enter, and many of them have no phones. How can they call for help if there is no phone?

This concern has been echoed by the United Nations Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination against Women. It is a body that tracks Canada's fulfillment of its commitments to the United Nations in this particular area. Every five years we get a report card. This is last year's report card. It says that the committee is concerned about the lack of shelters, support services, and other protective measures for women of gender-based violence, which reportedly prevents them from leaving their violent partners. The committee recommended strengthening services for women who are victims of gender-based violence by establishing shelters throughout the territory of Canada and ensuring the availability of psychosocial rehabilitation and reintegration programs. The committee also noted with concern the insufficient measures taken to ensure that all cases of murdered and missing indigenous women are duly investigated and prosecuted.

The government's response has been that although the government had promised to protect women and girls experiencing domestic abuse and violence, in the budget this spring it announced instead $20 million each year over the next five years. That is going to be spent within governments and for the RCMP, rather than a plan to directly fund services to victims. The Liberals' commitment is almost the same as their commitment to space exploration and I would have thought we could look after things at home first. Given especially that spousal violence and sexual assault cost the economy an estimated $12 billion a year, we should spend on this the way that countries like Australia do. They are way ahead of us so far as establishing a national action plan and funding victims services support.

I note also repeated urging from many parties in different provinces to fund domestic-violence leave. This means that if a woman has to leave her partner she has a few days, kind of like sick pay in her workplace, that she could take to find a new apartment to resettle her family and then be able to return to work. Risking their job and that one link to economic security is a terrible thing. Again and again, witnesses at the status of women committee and advocates and labour organizers across the country have urged that Canada establish a paid domestic-violence leave. It does not need to be used very often, but when it is needed it could help enormously. The current government has offered just three days of leave, unpaid.

I would like to hear from the minister's representative what the actionable items are that the government is taking right now that would make women in our country safer today.

[Terry Duguid, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary for Status of Women]

Madam Speaker, as always, I welcome the opportunity to participate in this adjournment debate. As the Minister of Status of Women has said, this government places gender at the heart of the work we do. This includes putting in place measures to prevent and address gender-based violence. To meet this commitment, the minister launched “It's Time: Canada's Strategy to Prevent and Address Gender-Based Violence.”

This strategy build on federal initiatives already under way and coordinates existing programs. It lays the foundation for greater action and is based on three pillars that will improve Canada's overall response to this form of violence, including prevention; support for survivors and their families; and, very importantly, promotion of responsive legal and justice systems. Through this strategy, gaps in support for diverse populations will be addressed, including women and girls; indigenous people; LGBTQ2 members; gender non-conforming people; and those living in northern, rural, and remote communities, as the member just referred to; people with disabilities; newcomers; children and youth; and seniors. Men and boys will also be engaged in important initiatives.

The strategy includes important investments as part of a government-wide approach, including $100.9 million over five years and $20.7 million per year thereafter to support the implementation of this work.

The strategy includes the creation of a gender-based violence knowledge centre within Status of Women Canada to better align existing resources across government and support the development and sharing of research and data for enhanced coordination of actions on gender-based violence. It will serve as a hub for sharing information between and among federal, provincial, and territorial governments, researchers, and service providers.

Status of Women Canada will fund projects to support diverse groups of survivors. New investments will also support a range of activities by other federal partners to address online child sexual exploitation, support members of the Canadian Armed Forces and their families affected by violence, develop and deliver cultural competency training to RCMP officers, and enhance the settlement program for newcomers.

Yesterday, the Minister of Families, Children and Social Development announced a 10-year $40 billion national housing strategy that will help reduce homelessness and improve the availability and quality of housing for Canadians in need. As part of the national housing strategy, our government is taking further action to support access to shelters as a priority. As a result of this strategy, 4,000 more shelter spaces will be created or repaired for survivors of family violence.

This is in addition to the budget investment in 2016 of $89.9 million over two years to enhance Canada's networks of shelters and transition houses through the construction or renovation of over 3,000 shelter spaces off reserve, with an additional $10.4 million over three years allocated to support the renovation and construction of new shelters for victims of family violence in first nation communities. Of course, that addresses the Northwest Territories issue the member brought up. Finally, a further $33.6 million over five years will support shelter operations on reserve.

[Sheila Malcolmson, NDP, Nanaimo—Ladysmith, BC]

Madam Speaker, on Saturday, the world marks the beginning of elimination of violence against women campaign. This has been running for decades and there are 16 days of action that run from Saturday right through to December 10, which is Human Rights Day.

I want to salute in particular the Vancouver Island University Students' Union and the Women's Collective, who have a whole range of on-the-ground action items that will make women safer and change lives right now. On Monday they will launch their Clothesline Project, which symbolizes the airing dirty laundry and engages people in conversations about domestic violence. I salute the work of these students and activists in our community, which is making a difference right now.

[Terry Duguid, Liberal, Winnipeg South, MB]

Madam Speaker, I salute the activities going on in the member's community. Yesterday our Minister of Status of Women launched 16 days of activism here in Ottawa at a local high school.

Back to the adjournment debate, in addition to the measures outlined previously, in budget 2017 we took further action by investing in a new national housing fund, with $300 million invested over the next 11 years for northern housing and $225 million invested over the next 11 years for off-reserve indigenous housing, and by expanding the homelessness partnering strategy. Both prioritize vulnerable populations, including survivors of family violence.

These actions further highlight our government's commitment to helping meet the needs of Canadians by addressing and preventing all forms of gender-based violence and by supporting survivors in important and valuable ways.

Fisheries and Oceans

[Gord Johns, NDP, Courtenay—Alberni, BC]

Madam Speaker, I am thankful to be able to further discuss the issue of the Somass River and the sockeye salmon run. I want to begin by underlining the real and significant importance of the Somass River salmon run in our riding. The Alberni Valley used to be a booming and thriving community that sent bucketloads of tax revenue to the federal government, thanks to a strong resource-based economy. This is no longer the case, as we have seen a tenfold increase over the last 10 years of raw logs, which is killing the value-added forest sector. Housing costs are skyrocketing, poverty is increasing, and the opioid crisis has taken its toll, as it has in other communities across B.C. and Canada. In fact, a recent StatsCan report shows that the Alberni Valley has the highest proportion of low-income people in British Columbia.

The nearby Somass River fishery represents an annual direct financial contribution of $12 million or more to the Alberni Valley and the surrounding Tseshaht and Hupacasath nations, and up to $40 million in spinoff activity annually. Historically, this run produces about 1.2 million, and up to 1.9 million, returning sockeye per year. This year we started the year with less than 170,000 forecast, and we hit just over 300,000. This is critical and is deemed to be in a red zone by the department of Fisheries and Oceans.

With a dramatically shortened season, our sockeye fishers took a massive hit to their income, and then most of them did not even have enough hours to qualify for employment insurance benefits. I want people to consider the impact on a seasonal worker whose entire industry is shut down for most of the season and who will receive no income and no financial support for the entire year.

We called on the government for extended EI. I took this to the Minister of Fisheries and Oceans, who sent me to the minister of labour, who then sent me to the Minister of Families, Children and Social Development, and then the parliamentary secretary of that department came back and asked me to go back to the department of Fisheries and Oceans minister. We have been getting the runaround. We have not had any response. People are needing support in our communities. It was a ministerial department merry-go-round, and today I am still looking for an answer for my constituents.

This is what I really need to know. Were the qualifying hours for EI previously reduced for fishers on the east coast during a time of crisis? If so, can we do that for our fishers on the west coast, and if not, why not? My constituents need the government's help.

The other issue related to the Somass River sockeye fishery is the long-term health of the fishery. The Liberal government created the coastal restoration fund to help restore coastal aquatic habitats. We have had a group called the West Coast Aquatic Stewardship Association, an incredible group, submit an application for funding under this program to enhance the Somass River sockeye run. Unfortunately, that application was rejected for what we think are questionable reasons. Time does not allow me to expand on this today, but I had a discussion with DFO officials and the minister through correspondence and in person, and I remain unconvinced of their reasoning. It is important to note that we actually received more money under the Harper government and the Conservatives for that river.

We know that the Somass River sockeye run is an important local economic driver for the Alberni Valley, the Tseshaht, and the Hupacasath and is a fragile, delicate ecosystem that is in a state of crisis. Knowing this, the Liberal government is still refusing to offer economic relief to our fishers, nor will it fund the restoration and enhancement of the Somass River fishery.

To close, what are we supposed to do, and what am I supposed to tell my constituents about the Liberal government's commitment to our economic and environmental well-being in Courtenay—Alberni?

[Terry Duguid, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary for Status of Women]

Madam Speaker, I would like to state for the record that my colleague, the Minister of Fisheries, Oceans and the Canadian Coast Guard, has made the conservation of Pacific salmon a top priority for his department. The minister is taking a leadership role with both global and domestic actions to address the trend of declining stocks.

This government understands the economic and cultural importance of this resource. Pacific salmon contributes to the B.C. economy and creates jobs in our coastal and local communities. This is why we are reinvesting in science, and engaging with indigenous groups, recreational fishers, and other stakeholder groups to support initiatives that will promote the recovery of these stocks.

For instance, in budget 2016, this government allocated $197.1 million in ocean and freshwater science. This is helping us deploy additional scientists to work on Pacific salmon. We remain committed to the conservation of wild Pacific salmon and the broader salmonid enhancement program, which will receive $27 million in federal funding this year, as well as a new $75-million coastal restoration package as part of our $1.5-billion oceans protection plan. Another $1.4-billion investment, as a result of the department's recent comprehensive review, has been added to support more evidence-based decision-making, more scientists, more habitat restoration, and more community partnerships.

The Minister of Fisheries, Oceans and the Canadian Coast Guard also has a mandate and a commitment to review the Fisheries Act to restore lost protections and incorporate modern safeguards. We are confident that any changes that will be brought forward to the Fisheries Act will benefit the habitat and conservation of all fish species, including Pacific salmon.

This government recognizes that strong and concerted action on the domestic front alone is not enough for the full stewardship of this important resource. We need to be active and forceful on the international front as well. I am pleased that Canada is currently in negotiations with the U.S. on the Pacific Salmon Treaty for five of the fishing chapters. These fishing chapters establish the requirements to conduct stock assessment, catch-monitoring, escapement-monitoring, and stock-monitoring activities. Signed and ratified in 1985, this treaty commits our two countries to work together on the conservation and sustainable management of Pacific salmon. The treaty is critical to the protection of Pacific salmon because of the salmon migration patterns. Salmon that spawn in Canadian rivers will often travel through U.S. waters over the course of their life cycle, prior to returning to their natal stream. A high degree of bilateral co-operation is essential to limit their interception by harvesters in U.S. waters and vice versa.

Finally, we will seek to ensure that Canadian cultural, social, and economic interests are safeguarded in the renewal of the treaty. Pacific salmon can only be protected if Canada works both domestically and internationally. To this end, this government remains fully engaged and committed.

[Gord Johns, NDP, Courtenay—Alberni, BC]

Madam Speaker, I am going to read a quote from Chief Cynthia Dick from the Tseshaht First Nation. She states, “Salmon has always been an important part of who we are as Tseshaht people. We rely on our salmon and our fishery beyond providing food security and to support our local economy. It's a major part of our culture, identity, and it brings us together as people.”

The government talks about indigenous people being its most important relationship, but we do not see it in our community. In fact, it is fighting the Nuu-chah-nulth people in court. The Liberals talk about their $1.5-billion oceans protection plan, but we are not seeing the help that we need. They talk about helping those who are not in the middle class join the middle class. We have the highest poverty in British Columbia. I have met with the Prime Minister, the Minister of Fisheries, Oceans and the Canadian Coast Guard, the assistant deputy minister, and DFO staff. I have met with a lot of people around this issue and we are not getting any answers, just more photo ops, and more statements that do not back up their whole mantra.

We need help. Is this member going to talk about—

[The Assistant Deputy Speaker, NDP, Carol Hughes]

The hon. Parliamentary Secretary for Status of Women.

[Terry Duguid, Liberal, Winnipeg South, MB]

Madam Speaker, I thank the hon. member for his passion on this issue. I will assure him that the Minister of Fisheries, Oceans and the Canadian Coast Guard has made the conservation of Pacific salmon a top priority and is working very hard to address the trend of declining stocks.

This government remains committed to the conservation of wild Pacific salmon by injecting new investments into federal funding this year to support more evidence-based decision-making. We are hiring more scientists, supporting more habitat restoration projects, and developing more community partnerships. I hope the hon. member would support that.

Finally, Pacific salmon can only be protected if Canada works both domestically and internationally. To this end, this government remains fully engaged and committed.

Government Appointments

[Luc Berthold, Conservative, Mégantic—L'Érable, QC]

Madam Speaker, it is my turn to wrap up another wonderful day here in the House with you.

I will start by doing something I rarely do. I will quote myself. I will quote what I said on June 20. This is the question I asked about the appointment of the official languages commissioner:

Mr. Speaker, under the false pretenses of openness and transparency, the Liberal government is busy being Liberal. It is secretive and partisan. Madeleine Meilleur's anticipated resignation, even before it was confirmed, sparked off long debates and seriously undermined the credibility of all future holders of senior positions. It is ridiculous. Because of the Liberals, the public's understanding is that, in order to be appointed, you must have contributed to the coffers or be a member of the select club of Liberal cronies.

Will the Prime Minister commit today to removing the Liberal Party of Canada membership card from the selection criteria?

That is what prompted me to select this topic for tonight's adjournment debate. I will be talking about it shortly. I think talking about the appointment of the official languages commissioner today is timely, but first, a little background.

The Liberals suffered a major setback when the candidate chosen for the position of Commissioner of Official Languages resigned before she had even been officially appointed, following fierce controversy. What was that controversy? It is worth remembering that Ms. Meilleur's qualifications were never in question. The issue was her political affiliation with the Liberals. The announcement caused an instant outcry, because it was seen as a highly partisan choice by the government opposite.

Ms. Meilleur, a former Ontario Liberal minister, added further fuel to the fire when she admitted that she had been in contact with two members of the Prime Minister's inner circle during the appointment process. At the time, the leader of the opposition said that, by dropping out, Ms. Meilleur had demonstrated better judgment than the Prime Minister. It would seem that history has proven him right.

Just recently, on November 7, Manon Cornellier wrote in Le Devoir that the Trudeau government is utterly useless at making appointments, having failed to appoint a single independent officer of Parliament in two years.

It boggles the mind to think about it. In two years, the Liberals have not been able to appoint a single independent officer of Parliament. Maybe there are not enough card-carrying Liberals who are qualified for these positions, in which case I would urge them to look elsewhere. There are other places they can look besides their own database of card-carrying Liberal Party members. The Liberals need to realize that they botched the appointment process for an extremely important position.

Today we learned that the Liberals have chosen a new Commissioner of Official Languages. The announcement was made not to the leaders of the opposition parties, but to the Canadian Press.

Could my colleague tell me whether the Liberals have chosen a new Commissioner of Official Languages as an officer of Parliament? A yes or no answer will do.

[Kevin Lamoureux, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the Leader of the Government in the House of Commons]

Madam Speaker, I can assure the member that the Government of Canada appointments that have been made were open and transparent and chose individuals with great merit. The question that the member originally posed was interesting. He said that we are appointing Liberals. Hundreds of appointments have been made, and I would be challenged to come up with names of Liberals that I am aware of. However, there is one person I am aware of, and I think a lot of Canadians are aware, and that is Kim Campbell. Kim Campbell is not a Liberal. She was a Progressive Conservative prime minister and, yes, the beneficiary of an appointment.

The reason I say that is that Canadians should know and understand, and I would suggest maybe even possibly appreciate, that there was a significant change in the manner appointments were being made since the last federal election. It highlights the open, transparent, and merit-based appointments. We have seen real, tangible results as a direct result of the open way appointments are being made. In fact, I suggest to my colleague across the way that the results are in the numbers. He will see very encouraging numbers. All Canadians are eligible to apply for federal appointments, and this government bases choice on merit and the credentials people have.

Under this new process, close to 400 appointments have been made. Think about this: almost 60% of those appointments are women, more than 12% are visible minorities, and 10% are indigenous. I know my friends across the way would recognize that, under this new process, no politicization has taken place. They might find that hard to believe, but I would encourage him to believe us on that point. That is the reason I mentioned the appointment of the former prime minister, Kim Campbell.

This new process will help strengthen trust in our democracy and ensure the integrity of our public institutions. Our aim is simple: to identify high-quality candidates who are committed to the principle of public service and embrace public service values. Further, the new appointment process will help achieve things such as gender parity and truly reflect Canada's diversity.

I suggest that Canadians can continue to apply for positions on commissions, boards, crown corporations, agencies, and tribunals across the country as the selection processes for more positions continue to be launched. It is an open and transparent process that is based on merit, and I would encourage Canadians to continue doing what they have done and apply for these positions.

[Luc Berthold, Conservative, Mégantic—L'Érable, QC]

Madam Speaker, it is an open process based on membership.

The Commissioner of Lobbying and the Conflict of Interest and Ethics Commissioner are in their third interim terms of office. The Information Commissioner announced that she will be leaving at the end of her term in June. She agreed to stay for another six months. The official languages commissioner has yet to be confirmed, and we still do not have a chief electoral officer, even with an election just two years away.

I hope that the Liberals are going to do things right so that Raymond Théberge, a Franco-Manitoban whose name appeared in the news today, does not fall victim to another botched process by the Liberals. I hope that this time they will follow the rules and consult the leaders of the opposition so that they do not make anyone else go through what Ms. Meilleur went through.

[Kevin Lamoureux, Liberal, Winnipeg North, MB]

Madam Speaker, clearly actions speak louder than words on this particular issue, and I would suggest that members across the way really need to take a broader look at all the appointments that have been made. The member across the way says, or implies, that they are all Liberals. I would be interested in seeing the names the member says are all Liberal appointments. I could not say whether 98% of them have Liberal Party memberships or ever had Liberal Party memberships. What I know is that the government does not make membership part of the criteria. What is important is what they bring to the table. Those are the types of appointments that have been made by this government. Canadians should feel confident in that.

[The Assistant Deputy Speaker, NDP, Carol Hughes]

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 6:50 p.m.)