Debates of May 18th, 2017

Question No. 949

[Jim Carr, Liberal, Minister of Natural Resources]

Mr. Speaker, Natural Resources Canada is not the federal lead on carbon pricing, but works in close collaboration with federal partners and provincial colleagues to assess the impacts of carbon pricing and to explore measures to minimize the potential impacts on Canada’s trade-exposed sectors.

Natural Resources Canada, with its federal and provincial partners on the working group on carbon pricing mechanisms, reviewed the potential impacts of various carbon pricing scenarios. These impacts will be dependent on the design of each provincial system and how that province chooses to reinvest any revenue that it generates. Carbon pricing is widely accepted as the most efficient measure to achieve emission reductions. Further analysis on the economic impacts of carbon pricing will become available as each province and territory clarifies the precise design of its carbon pricing systems.

Question No. 954

[Dave MacKenzie, Conservative, Oxford, ON]

With regard to page 11 of the Guide for Parliamentary Secretaries published by the Privy Council Office in December 2015, where it states that Parliamentary Secretaries are “prohibited from accepting sponsored travel”: (a) does the government consider the trips taken by Parliamentary Secretary Khera and Parliamentary Secretary Virani, which are listed in the 2016 sponsored travel report by the Conflict of Interest and Ethics Commissioner, to be a violation of the guide; (b) if the answer to (a) is affirmative, what corrective measures were taken to reconcile the violation; and (c) if the answer to (a) is negative, why does the government not consider these trips to be a violation?

[Peter Schiefke, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the Prime Minister (Youth)]

Mr. Speaker, with regard to trips taken by Ms. Khera and Mr. Virani, their sponsored travel was pre-approved by the Office of the Conflict of Interest and Ethics Commissioner.

Furthermore, Ms. Khera and Mr. Virani made the proper and appropriate public declarations to the Office of the Conflict of Interest and Ethics Commissioner upon their return, in accordance with the rules that govern the practice of sponsored travel.

Sponsored travel is not unusual for ministers and parliamentary secretaries.

For example, Ms. Kerry-Lynne Findlay, the former Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Justice, travelled to Taiwan on a trip that was sponsored by the Chinese International Economic Cooperation Association.

Moreover, Hon. John Baird, while he was Minister of Foreign Affairs, travelled to Washington, D.C., a trip that was sponsored by the American Israel Public Affairs Committee.

Questions Passed as Orders for Returns

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

Mr. Speaker, if Question No. 950 could be made an order for return, this return would be tabled immediately.

[The Speaker, Geoff Regan]

Is it the pleasure of the House that the aforementioned question be made an order for return and that it be tabled immediately?

[Some hon. members]

Agreed.

Question No. 950

[Mark Strahl, Conservative, Chilliwack—Hope, BC]

With regard to the decision by the government to designate all Canadian waters in the Arctic as indefinitely off-limits to future oil and gas licensing, a ban that will be reviewed every five years: (a) what scientific analyses were undertaken by the Department of Natural Resources on the impacts of arctic offshore drilling; (b) have the scientific analyses completed in (a) been subjected to scientific peer review and, if so, by whom; (c) was an economic analysis completed to determine the impact this decision will have on the economies of (i) the Northwest Territories, (ii) Yukon, (iii) Nunavut; (d) if the answer to (c) is in the affirmative, what were the results of this analysis, broken down by territory; (e) if the answer to (c) is negative, what was the rationale for proceeding with the decision; (f) what were the estimated reductions in greenhouse gas emissions as a result of the decision; (g) broken down by territory, what consultations took place in the areas affected by the decision with (i) indigenous communities, (ii) territorial governments, (iii) local governments, (iv) other organizations; and (h) of the consultations completed in (g) what are the (i) dates, (ii) locations?

(Return tabled)

Questions Passed as Orders for Returns

[Kevin Lamoureux, Liberal, Winnipeg North, MB]

Mr. Speaker, I would ask that all remaining questions be allowed to stand.

[The Speaker, Geoff Regan]

Is that agreed?

[Some hon. members]

Agreed.

Comments of Minister of National Defence—Speaker's Ruling

[The Speaker, Geoff Regan]

I am now prepared to rule on the question of privilege raised on April 4, 2017, by the honourable member for Selkirk—Interlake—Eastman concerning allegedly misleading statements made by the Minister of National Defence.

I would like to thank the member for Selkirk—Interlake—Eastman for having raised this matter, as well as the Parliamentary Secretary to the Leader of the Government in the House of Commons for his contribution.

In presenting his case, the member for Selkirk—Interlake—Eastman explained that the answer to written Question No. 600, tabled in the House on January 30, 2017, and signed by the Minister of National Defence, stated that all members of the Canadian Armed Forces deployed in Operation Impact in Kuwait and Iraq were granted tax relief benefits by the previous government. In later submissions, on May 3 and 16, 2017, the member added that a press release issued by the minister on April 19, 2017, a briefing note prepared for the minister obtained through an access to information request, and a ministerial order issued by the President of the Treasury Board on April 17, 2017, further supported this assertion.

The member argued that the minister misled the House when, in answers to oral questions on March 8 and 21, 2017, he stated that members of the Canadian Armed Forces were sent by the previous government to Iraq and Kuwait without the tax-free allowance at the time of their deployment.

The member for Selkirk—Interlake—Eastman alleged that these two seemingly contradictory versions of events were misleading the House and therefore constituted a prima facie question of privilege since, as he stated, “Only one of these statements can be true.” In one of his submissions, the member presented evidence to support his contention that, and I quote:

...the Minister of National Defence has misled, fabricated, and embellished other issues on numerous occasions in addition to my original question of privilege.

For his part, the Parliamentary Secretary to the Leader of the Government in the House of Commons explained that, as the tax relief in question was applied retroactively, the minister had in fact provided the very same information when responding to Order Paper Question No. 600 and to oral questions asked in the House. Thus, he characterized the matter as a dispute as to facts and not a question of privilege

Members have a right to request and obtain trustworthy information in order to carry out their parliamentary duties. This reliance on access to accurate information is the cornerstone of their ability to hold the government to account. As a result, the Chair has often been called upon to rule on the quality, completeness, and internal coherence of information provided in responses to questions, whether oral or written.

As members will know, the exchange of information in this place is constantly subject to varying and, yes, contradictory views and perceptions. This, of course, heightens the risk that, inadvertently, a member making a statement may be mistaken, or, in turn, that a member listening may misunderstand what another has stated.

This, in large part, is why strong, even indisputable evidence is needed for the Chair to reach the very serious conclusion that the House has been deliberately misled and that therefore a prima facie question of privilege exists.

To aid in this arduous task, the Chair is guided by three clear and well-established conditions, which my predecessor outlined in his ruling of April 29, 2015, when he stated at page 13197 of Debates:

…first, the statement needs to be misleading. Second, the member making the statement has to know that the statement was incorrect when it was made. Finally, it needs to be proven that the member intended to mislead the House by making the statement.

These criteria are meant to protect members as they freely express views that can be at odds with the views of other members.

Without evidence meeting these conditions, when faced with this type of allegation, the Chair has consistently concluded that the House has not, in fact, been deliberately misled, but rather that the matter can only be viewed as a disagreement on the interpretation of facts.

Thus, while the member for Selkirk—Interlake—Eastman may be in disagreement with the statements made by the Minister of National Defence, there was no evidence presented that would suggest that the three necessary conditions existed in this case or that the Chair has cause, exceptionally, to overlook the long-standing practice of taking members at their word when the accuracy of their statements is called into question.

As stated at page 145 of House of Commons Procedure and Practice, second edition:

If the question of privilege involves a disagreement between two (or more) Members as to facts, the Speaker typically rules that such a dispute does not prevent Members from fulfilling their parliamentary functions nor does such a disagreement breach the collective privileges of the House.

As such, the Chair concludes that no prima facie case of privilege exists in this case.

I thank hon. members for their attention.

Commissioner of Official Languages

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

Mr. Speaker, I am rising to address the point of order raised by the House leaders of the Conservative Party and the New Democratic Party respecting the appointment process for the position of Commissioner of Official Languages. Both these members alleged that one of the two conditions set out in section 49 of the Official Languages Act has not been met. Section 49 provides:

The Governor in Council shall, by commission under the Great Seal, appoint a Commissioner of Official Languages for Canada after consultation with the leader of every recognized party in the Senate and House of Commons and approval of the appointment by resolution of the Senate and House of Commons.

On May 8, 2017, the Prime Minister wrote to the leaders of the Conservative Party and the New Democratic Party pursuant to the requirements in the statute to consult on the proposed appointments of the Commissioner of Official Languages for Canada. The Prime Minister requested the views of the two leaders on the proposed appointments.

On May 10, the leader of the Conservative Party responded to the Prime Minister on the proposed appointment, and on May 12, the leader of the New Democratic Party also provided his views. The requirement is to consult, not to abide by the recommendations of the leaders of the two recognized parties. This statutory condition has in fact been met.

I would draw to the attention of the members the situation in the previous Parliament respecting the appointment of the Auditor General. The previous prime minister consulted the then leader of the Liberal Party, Bob Rae, and the leader of the NDP on the proposed appointment of Mr. Ferguson to the position of Auditor General. While I cannot comment on the response of the NDP leader, Mr. Rae raised concerns about the proficiency of Mr. Ferguson to speak French and therefore asked Mr. Harper to restart the selection process to find a bilingual candidate.

Additionally, the NDP House leader raised an argument that there are legal precedents respecting what constitutes consultation. There are clear precedents that the Speaker is not authorized to adjudicate on legal matters.

On November 28, 2002, the Speaker ruled:

This principle is clearly outlined as well as in the fourth edition of Bourinot at page 180, which states:

The Speaker...will not give a decision upon a constitutional question, nor decide a question of law, though the same be arranged on a point of order or privilege.

It is not up to the Speaker to rule on the constitutionality or the legality of measures before the House.

While the opposition parties may not agree with the nominee for the position of Commissioner of Official Languages, that opposition does not constitute a veto over the proposed appointment. We will let the House decide upon the matter.

[The Speaker, Geoff Regan]

I thank the hon. Parliamentary Secretary to the Leader of the Government in the House of Commons for his intervention on the question of the point of order raised yesterday by the hon. member for Victoria, and on which also I have heard from the hon. opposition House leader. I will come back to the House in due course with a ruling.

Opposition Motion—Autism Spectrum Disorder

[Mike Lake, Conservative, Edmonton—Wetaskiwin, AB]

moved:

That, given that: (a) Autism Spectrum Disorder (“autism”) is widely considered the fastest growing neurological disorder in Canada, impacting an estimated 1 in 68 children; (b) it is a lifelong diagnosis that manifests itself in a wide-range of symptoms, including difficulty communicating, social impairments, and restricted and repetitive behaviour; (c) individuals with autism and their families face unique challenges over their lifespan, often leading to families in crisis situations; and (d) Autism Spectrum Disorder is not just a health issue — it has overarching implications for Canadian society as a whole; accordingly, the House call on the government to grant the $19 million over 5 years requested by the Canadian Autism Partnership working group, Self-Advocates advisory group, and the Canadian Autism Spectrum Disorders Alliance, in order to establish a Canadian Autism Partnership that would support families and address key issues such as information sharing and research, early detection, diagnosis and treatment.

Mr. Speaker, today is a very important day. I believe today is the first time the House has spent a full day talking about the challenges faced by Canadians living with autism and their families.

I am going to start by thanking a few people. Obviously, I am going to start by thanking my son, Jaden, who, to me, is an absolute superhero. This is a 21-year-old who is non-verbal, yet the way he communicates with people on a one-to-one basis is unlike anyone I have ever seen. He has a way to connect with people, without speaking, that we have trouble with in our regular lives.

I want to thank my amazing daughter, Jenae, who turns 18 this week. She is graduating from high school this month as well. It is hard to believe.

I speak for a living and do interviews for a living, but Jenae probably gave the best answer I have ever heard to an interview question when she was 13 years old. She was asked by Steve Paikin, in an interview about her brother, if she ever wished her brother was “normal”, like every other kid. Jenae's response was that since Jaden was diagnosed with autism before she was born, she didn't exactly know what a normal brother was like, so Jaden, having autism, kind of was her normal. Steve asked her if she liked him just the way he was. She said that if Jaden did not have autism, or was cured or something, he would not be the same as Jaden was then. Jenae was very wise at 13 years old talking about how Jaden has impacted her life.

I also want to thank Jaden's mother, Debi. We have been apart for several years now, but Debi is an absolute champion for Jaden and has been a champion for Jaden throughout his life. When it came to advocating for him at a young age for early intervention, when it came to working through the school system and in the battle to try to get an aide for him, she was a pit bull for him in terms of that advocacy. We were able to get the help he needed every step of the way because of her advocacy and her championing of his interests.

I have a few more people to thank. I want to thank my staff, who put in tireless hours month after month. We work on a lot of big things: the global autism partnership; the Canadian autism partnership; global maternal health and the rights of women and girls around the world; managing the largest constituency in the country, out of 338 constituencies; and working with constituents. I thank them.

I am going to go back a little in time and thank Stephen Harper, the prime minister in 2015, who initiated the Canadian autism partnership working group, along with former finance minister Joe Oliver and our health minister at the time, who is now our current Leader of the Opposition. In budget 2015, there was $2 million put in place to establish the Canadian autism partnership working group.

There were some staff members at that time who were critical in helping me understand the road to getting there. I will thank Rachel Curran, Sean Speer, and David van Hemmen, in particular, for their help in getting there.

In my global work, I get to work with some key individuals and global organizations that have come to support the Canadian autism partnership. Huge thanks go to Save the Children, Plan International Canada, World Vision Canada, and UNICEF Canada, which have really stepped up on social media to support this initiative.

Global Citizen is an organization that works to alleviate poverty and fight inequality around the world on behalf of the world's most vulnerable. Global Citizen in Canada has chosen, as its first domestic initiative, to champion the Canadian autism partnership, recognizing the challenges faced by Canadian families living with autism. A huge thanks goes to the folks at Global Citizen for the great work they have done.

We have also had some support from friends in the hockey world. I formerly worked for the Edmonton Oilers for 10 years before I was elected. We have had support on social media from Hayley Wickenheiser, Elliotte Friedman, Steve Warne, right here in Ottawa, and Kodette LaBarbera. Again, they have huge platforms and are very busy at this time, and they have taken the time to make their point on social media in support of the Canadian autism partnership. I thank them.

Most important, probably, beyond my family, is to thank the stakeholders, the working groups, and the incredible group of self-advocates, adults living with autism who can articulate, in a unique way, what it is like to have autism.

I had a really great conversation with one of them, Patricia, this weekend. We talked about the importance of the Canadian autism partnership. Every single time I talked to a self-advocate, I learn something new. In Patricia's case, it was the word “autistic“ versus “having autism”.

I have always talked about Jaden having autism, because I have always thought it was something he has, not something he is, but Patricia reinforced for me that for some in the autism community, they like to be defined as autistic. It is who they are, not something they have. It is an important differentiation, and I got an understanding I did not have before we had that conversation this past weekend.

Of course, I want to thank people who come up to me in random places who appreciate the work we are doing and who work to understand. I remember one time a few years back, Jaden and I were in New York at the Radio City Music Hall. Jaden, Jenae, and I were watching a Kelly Clarkson concert. Jaden dropped a pin on the floor and was obsessed with this pin the entire concert, so the entire concert, for me and Jaden, was spent with Jaden rummaging around for the pin, bumping the chair in front of him. We never did find the pin, but during the entire concert, that was the case, with me trying to grab him and play with him and get his attention away from it. The person in front of us, whose seat he had been bumping the whole time, turned around afterward. I thought she was going to be upset, and she said, “You are the best dad in the world.” This complete stranger had noticed what was going on, and rather than being upset about it, rather than ignoring it and just walking away, she took time to let me know that she noticed and to let me know that she understood that it was difficult. I had tears in my eyes, as one can imagine, leaving that concert. She was someone I will never meet again. I never got the person's name. She never got my name, but in that moment, it was that level of understanding that, as parents of kids with autism or family members of people with autism, we need. We need that understanding more and more in our society when different things are happening.

When Jaden was three, as we were walking out of a restaurant, he grabbed a drink of someone's beer off a table, because he was thirsty, there was a glass there, and he did not understand that he was not supposed to have it. There was the time we were at an Oilers hockey game, when Jaden was nine, and he suddenly, out of nowhere, reached over the shoulder of the five-year-old girl in front of him and grabbed the ice cream off the top of her cone, as if he had a snowball, and started eating it out of his hand, with ice cream dripping down his fingers. I said to the dad, “I'm so sorry, Jaden has autism”, and he understood. Of course, the five-year-old girl did not understand at all. We explained it, we got her a new ice cream at the intermission, and everything was good. That is life with Jaden, and it can be challenging sometimes.

When I talk about the Canadian autism partnership and the work we do on autism here in this House, a lot of people make the mistake of thinking that I am championing my son's interests. Jaden has lived in one of the best places in the world to live, Alberta, if one has a child with autism. What I am really championing is for every person living with autism in Canada to have the same opportunities Jaden has had.

When Jaden was two, we realized he had autism. It took a bit to get a diagnosis. It took a couple of months to get in and then maybe a couple of months to get treatment, but Jaden started his early intervention at about two and a half. At that time, he did not even recognize me. Folks in this House have seen Jaden interact now, and he has interacted with many of them. However, back then, his main interaction with me was that he would come into a room where I was, grab me, and drag me through the house to the pantry. He would grab my arm and push it up to the pantry door, push my arm into the pantry to the shelf where he wanted to grab the crackers he could not reach, and then pull me out and pull my arm down, like his own personal robot. He would grab the crackers he wanted, put them back in my hand, push my arm back up, back into the pantry, and then push me away. He did this as a two-and-a-half-year-old or three-year-old. I had served his purpose as his personal robot. He had his crackers. He would go back to playing with his pots and pans, lining them up, stacking them up, obsessed with them for hours, sometimes. He would take breaks to watch Barney videos or The Sound of Music, which he watched about 300 times. I liked The Sound of Music the first 100 times. I still like it now. Anyway, that was life with Jaden.

The early intervention completely changed his mind. It started with putting a spoon on the table and getting him to give us the spoon. It was to have him recognize what a thing was and, hand over hand, have him hand us the spoon. We would then celebrate it by clapping and giving him a Smartie as a reward. Over and over again, we would do this one thing, and then eventually, it was a spoon and a fork or something else. This continued and got better. We started to help him build social interactions and recognize other things over the course of that time. Some of Jenae's earliest memories, as someone three and a half years younger, were, when she was two, learning English by watching Jaden do his early intervention and sometimes doing it with him.

There is video of Jenae with a car and a big stuffed Zoe, and Jenae loves Zoe. She would say, “Jaden, give me Zoe”, and Jaden would give her Zoe. That is the way she learned language, by interacting with Jaden over the course of time. That is really important.

As Jaden got older, he went to school, and we had to deal with trying to get him a full-time aid. Jaden has a photographic memory. Jaden knows where the swimming pool is, and he loves swimming, but he does not understand traffic at all. Even at 21, he does not understand traffic. We have to work with him to navigate that. He could leave the school and know where the swimming pool was, but it would be very dangerous for him, so we had to have someone with him at all times. That took a bit of education with the school system.

Jaden now, at 21, is in a program at the Centre for Autism Services of Alberta. It is called Quest for Independence. He went to school until last year, but now he is sort of transitioning. The goal, of course, is to get him into a vocation of some sort, but that is a challenge. It is a challenge across the country getting people who have gone through the school system into a vocation of some sort and into the training they need. There is also the mitigation of some of the challenges they might have, depending on where they are on the spectrum, navigating a job interview and that kind of process, which is very abstract for people with autism.

Of course, the question we then have is what happens as Jaden gets older. Right now we have an agreement that Jaden will live with one or the other of us, and we are good with that. However, there is going to come a time, and this is the hardest question for every parent of a child with autism, or any developmental disability in this country, when we are not there anymore. My hope is that we have built a society in this country that is so supportive of people who are different, people who need some level of support, that we need not fear that and we have built an environment that goes beyond family.

Jaden has only one sibling. Jenae cannot be expected to take care of Jaden for the rest of his life. Certainly she knows that she is his only sibling and is prepared for whatever responsibility she has as his sister, and she loves him very much, but we need to build a support system around that for families.

That brings us to the Canadian autism partnership. There has been a history to get here, working with the Canadian Autism Spectrum Disorders Alliance, CASDA, and stakeholders from across the country. There had been a call for a national autism strategy for many years. We got to a point where we started asking the stakeholders what they actually want. What is it they are looking for? Many of the things the autism community is looking for are provincial in nature. They are provincially delivered, such as education, health care, and social services, and the provinces are responsible for them.

In 2014, we saw that there was a role to play in vocations, so in budget 2014, Jim Flaherty, at the time, put in place funding for a CommunityWorks program and a program called Ready, Willing & Able, two programs to help people with autism in the vocational world. In budget 2015, we worked with CASDA and other stakeholders to ask for the Canadian autism partnership, and as mentioned earlier, $2 million over two years was given to a working group to establish that partnership, with a clear indication, at the time, that the partnership would be funded once this expert working group had done its work, along with the other stakeholders and self-advocates.

They did incredible work. They worked for years on that. They submitted their business plan and then asked the government of the day, this past fall, for $19 million over five years, or $3.8 million a year. As I mentioned in this House yesterday, $3.8 million a year is one dime per Canadian. It is a dime per Canadian for a Canadian autism partnership.

I have to say that there was an expectation that this was a no-brainer and that it would be funded for sure. How could one not support an evidence-based business plan, put together by stakeholders from across the country, that would help hundreds of thousands of Canadians as vulnerable as those living with autism? Inexplicably, it was not in budget 2017. It was rejected.

Now we have moved forward, and we are asking that it be funded anyway, that the government find a way to find that dime per Canadian to help Canadians living with autism. We have come to this point where we have an opposition day, a full day in this House, dedicated to a single question. It is not like a budget, where there are a whole bunch of other things thrown into the mix. We are just going to debate this one idea of a Canadian autism partnership. In the end, probably a couple of weeks from now, we will vote on it. Every single member in this House will vote on this. It is an important opportunity.

John Wooden, a famous NCAA basketball coach, has one of my favourite quotes. He said, “You can't live a perfect day without doing something for someone who will never be able to repay you.” That is a fantastic quote and is applicable in some way today.

For the members, and Canadians who might be watching this, if we do something for people with autism, they will be able to repay us. That is the point. People with autism and other developmental disabilities are capable of way more than we give them credit for, but we have to invest in them, just like we invest in everyone else in our society. We have to believe in them. Sometimes it means we have to work a little harder to understand some of the challenges, like the difficulty dealing with the abstract. Why is 85% on the spectrum not employed? Let us work hard to understand that and to figure out how we get the opportunity to benefit from those skills and abilities.

If people have just met Jaden and he gives them a high five, it is really easy to underestimate him. However, if they see him working in the library, putting books away, it is astonishing how much he is capable of. He will be putting books away. He will have them all in order and will be running around the library putting the books where they belong, never making a mistake. However, as Jaden is running around the library, if he sees a book that has been put in the wrong spot, he will grab it without skipping a beat and put it in the right spot. He sees the world differently, but he will not be able to use those skills if we do not pay attention to them, if we do not hard wire our society to look for that. The Canadian autism partnership is all about that.

The Canadian autism partnership recognizes jurisdiction and brings experts together from across the country to deal with families with autism. Then it advises governments in the jurisdictions. It might take a look at something like early intervention or diagnosis. Right now In Quebec, families are facing a two-year wait for diagnosis and then a two-year wait for treatment. Their kids are two years old. They know they have autism, yet they cannot get them diagnosed until they are four and they cannot get the evidence-based treatment they need until they are six. Families are mortgaging their houses to get this evidence-based treatment.

The Canadian autism partnership would work with the Government of Quebec and show it what evidence shows will work. It would be a trusted adviser with the Government of Quebec, or any other government. Multiple governments across the country are having difficulty in various areas. Education, housing, transition to employment, all of those things are challenging. The Canadian autism partnership would bring the best information from across the country and around the world and ensure it would be distributed in a way that policy could be executed right now so we would not have to wait for this.

As I wrap up, I will use one more quote. JFK said, “Things don’t happen, they are made to happen.” That is where we are right now.

For folks in the autism community who might be watching this right now, or anyone else who has heard what I have said and understands its importance, we need to act. I believed, and I think stakeholders believed this as well, that budget 2017 would contain the funding for the Canadian autism partnership. It seemed like a no-brainer at the time. However, it did not.

Quite honestly, when I stood and asked my question in the House of Commons yesterday, I believed that maybe at this point, knowing the motion was coming, the minister might stand and say that the government had thought about it, that it had made a mistake, and that had decided it would to do it. That did not happen.

I firmly believe that if Canadians speak up and make their voices heard, through the Global Citizen action, directly to their members of Parliament, when the vote comes on this in a couple of weeks, members of the House will vote the right way. People from all parties get elected because they want to make a difference in the lives of people. This is a clear motion, a clear opportunity to make a difference in the lives of hundreds of thousands of Canadians.

I want to thank members of Parliament for hearing me out on this. I look forward to the debate today. If people watching have any questions, or want to take part, my Facebook and Twitter handle are “MikeLakeMP”. Pinned to the top is the Global Citizen action. I ask them to take action and help our elected officials make the right decision.

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

Madam Speaker, I would like to compliment the member across the way. It takes courage to be a strong advocate, and I have witnessed that not only today but on other occasions when the member has talked about his wonderful son Jaden. I think all members of the House would join me in expressing our best wishes to Jaden, and to compliment his father for the outstanding work he has done, not just in the last year or so but virtually since the birth of Jaden. No doubt Jaden is an outstanding individual who contributes to our society in many different ways.

Autism disorder affects so many Canadians in every region of the country. I also have first-hand experience with autism. I have had to deal with it in my family. I understand and appreciate how important this issue is.

The member made reference to the Minister of Health. I can assure the member, and all members of the House, that she views this in a very serious way. We know that. That is all part of the negotiations that take place with the different partners and stakeholders across Canada.

I used to be the health critic for the province of Manitoba, and it goes beyond just one department. Would the member agree that the best thing a national government can do is demonstrate leadership in working with the many different provincial and territorial jurisdictions to try to build a consensus on how to best deal with this?

[Mike Lake, Conservative, Edmonton—Wetaskiwin, AB]

Madam Speaker, the member should know that the Canadian autism partnership working group travelled from coast to coast and worked with every government. In fact, CAP is endorsed by governments across the country. This is the very mechanism the member spoke of when he asked his question. CAP is designed to work with governments, in their jurisdictions, on issues facing families with autism. I can assure him that it will make a very real difference for those families.

[Linda Duncan, NDP, Edmonton Strathcona, AB]

Madam Speaker, I have frequently met my colleague from Edmonton—Wetaskiwin's handsome son over the eight years I have been here, and I pay tribute to the member and his former wife for the good job they have done in raising their children.

Two members of the House have had experience with autism in their families. However, I think it would be fair to say that probably every member in this place, if not having experienced it with his or her family, has experienced it with friends, extended family or in his or her community.

My understanding is that the purpose of this organization is to ensure that everyone in Canada has access to the kinds of services and supports the member's son has had. I wonder if the member could speak a bit more to what this partnership is supposed to enable so all children can access those services.

[Mike Lake, Conservative, Edmonton—Wetaskiwin, AB]

Madam Speaker, one in 68 people live with autism. If we think about an average family of four, that means one in 17 Canadians lives in a family with someone with autism.

It took a long time to get there, and a lot of conversations with incredible public servants in health and of course in our government at the time to ensure we had something that respected jurisdiction and had a meaningful impact. The Canadian autism partnership will do that. It is not just another autism organization. It is a partnership with the Canadian autism community, speaking with one authoritative voice as best it can, not always unanimously, finding that 80% we can agree upon, and to give evidence-based advice to government so elected people from all political parties in all parts of the country can make the best decisions possible.

[Alupa Clarke, Conservative, Beauport—Limoilou, QC]

Madam Speaker, I thank my colleague for his speech and the work that he does on this issue.

I missed the better part of his speech, so he may have already gone over this, but beyond the monetary investment that the Liberal government should be making in this area, what else can it do to proactively help those suffering from autism spectrum disorder? I imagine that there is something more tangible than monetary investments that the government should be providing. I wonder if the hon. member could elaborate on that.

[Mike Lake, Conservative, Edmonton—Wetaskiwin, AB]

Madam Speaker, while it is a Canadian autism partnership, one thing that everyone has had on their minds, as we discuss this with stakeholders, is that the impact needs to be beyond just the world of autism.

For example, it was brought up a couple of times that the government was undertaking accessibility legislation. The Canadian autism partnership would work to help inform accessibility legislation on behalf of Canadians living with autism. It would work with other organizations, for example, the Canadian Association for Community Living. It might work with that organization on housing and sharing ideas on not only how to help Canadians living with autism, but other Canadians living with other development disabilities, which the CACL serves. There is huge potential.

When we talk about the CAP informing and advising governments in their jurisdictions, that includes the federal government. A big focus, for example, for the working group and others working on this is aboriginal communities and how the Canadian autism partnership might work with them to better serve their families living with autism.

[Stéphane Lauzon, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary for Sport and Persons with Disabilities]

Madam Speaker, first of all I want to congratulate my colleague opposite for his speech, his commitment, and also his support for Jaden. I have met his son on the Hill, and I support the member's efforts on this file.

As the Parliamentary Secretary for Sport and Persons with Disabilities, I have learned about this issue from all the members of organizations that we have met across Canada, from coast to coast. I can say that I have been really moved by this issue. Furthermore, my wife has devoted her life to autism. She is a special education teacher who works with very young children in schools. I hear about it every day. I have learned a lot about it. We are working hard to pass legislation on this issue.

I would like to ask my colleague opposite a question: could this bill that we have been working on across Canada include the ideas presented today?

[Mike Lake, Conservative, Edmonton—Wetaskiwin, AB]

Madam Speaker, I am not 100% clear what the question was, even with translation.

I appreciate the sentiment and best wishes. I do not question that members on all sides of the House like the work I am doing and like my son Jaden. However, we will not get anywhere if we never get beyond best wishes.

Families across the country need action now. Today families learn their children have autism because there is more and more information, or some informal relationship, a friend or someone like that, has helped them understand their children have autism. However, they wait a year or two for a diagnosis that will help them get the treatment they need. Then they wait a year or two for that treatment. They desperately need that now. To lose that window is devastating for those families. In many cases, if they can afford it, they mortgage their houses to do it, because they know their children need the help today.

This debate seems to continue to drag on without any commitment to move forward. We need to move beyond the conversation in the House of Commons and pass this motion now. It is just a motion; it is not binding, in and of itself. The government then needs to act when it is passed. Families need this now.

[Joël Lightbound, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Health]

Madam Speaker, I would like to begin by thanking the member for Edmonton—Wetaskiwin for his eloquent and much appreciated speech.

I am pleased to be in the House today to speak to an important issue that affects people from all walks of life: autism spectrum disorder. This disorder has a significant and life-long impact on those diagnosed with it, as well as on their families.

In 2007 that the Standing Senate Committee on Social Affairs, Science and Technology released its report entitled, “Pay Now or Pay Later: Autism Families in Crisis”. This important study brought the challenges facing families clearly into view. It stimulated dialogue, and continues to be an important source of motivation and inspiration for those working to better support children, youth, and adults with autism.

We all know that autism spectrum disorder, or ASD, is a complex disorder that manifests differently from person to person. Unfortunately, we do not fully understand what causes it.

Canada has a world-class ASD research community, as well as dedicated health care and social service providers, who are working with ASD organizations and families to make a difference in the lives of those with this condition.

Whether working to improve diagnosis and treatment, support in schools, or transition into employment, Canada's ASD stakeholders are passionate and committed to creating inclusive communities for people with ASD. I thank them for their ongoing efforts.

We must recognize that we must support not only the people with ASD, but also their families. The complex challenges facing those living with ASD have seen these families call on the government for help. Raising a child is not easy, and we know that raising a child with autism poses even more challenges.

While these are areas of provincial and territorial jurisdiction, the work we are doing federally complements and supports provincial and territorial efforts. Today, I would like to talk about the Government of Canada's response in helping individuals with ASD and their families.

We know that ASD often means health, social, and financial challenges. It is estimated that the lifetime cost for an ASD-diagnosed individual ranges from $1.12 million to $4.7 million. Data on ASD in Canada is limited, but estimates indicate that approximately one in 94 children under the age of 14 has been diagnosed with ASD. It is also estimated that boys are five times more likely to be diagnosed with ASD than girls.

It is critical to bring knowledge, awareness, analysis, and action to this issue so that we can provide the right level of support to those in need.

Last November, the Canadian Autism Spectrum Disorder Alliance, CASDA, presented the minister with its Canadian autism partnership business plan. This plan outlined key areas that need to be developed and addressed. These include research, early detection and treatment, and family support. The government is investing in these key areas, as outlined in the Canadian autism partnership business plan.

The federal government's investments in research, data and vocational training are supporting those affected by this disorder. For example, through the Canadian Institutes of Health Research, the Government of Canada has invested more than $39 million over the last five years to support autism research.

Canadian scientists are at the forefront of this research, and these funds are helping our researchers develop new tools and treatments for those living with ASD.

For example, in the area of genomics, Canadian researchers are building our knowledge and deepening our understanding of ASD, which could eventually lead to earlier diagnosis. We know that early diagnosis for ASD is very important. It helps ensure children and families get the help they need as soon as possible.

These researchers are also studying the connection between mental health and ASD, evaluating novel treatment strategies, and looking for ways to improve access to health care for those with ASD.

Furthermore, the Canadian Institutes of Health Research is providing funding for a research chair in autism spectrum disorders, currently held by Dr. Jonathan Weiss at York University, which focuses on the prevention and treatment of mental health problems in people with ASD.

Since the launch of this initiative in January 2013, Dr. Weiss and his team have published a number of articles to disseminate information to physicians and parents to help address mental health problems in youth suffering from ASD. We believe that this valuable work will lead to improved treatment, care, and policies for children and youth with ASD.

The Canadian Institutes of Health Research, in collaboration with the Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council and the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council, also committed an investment of $39 million over 10 years from 2009 to 2019. This funding will support the Kids Brain Health trans-Canadian network.

The network focuses on improving diagnosis, treatment, and support for families raising children with brain-based disabilities, such as autism.

Beyond the research, it is imperative that we gather accurate data about ASD in Canada. To achieve this objective, the Public Health Agency of Canada is working with the provinces and territories to establish the national ASD surveillance system.

Once established, this system will enable us to gather reliable information on the number of Canadians living with ASD and the number of new cases every year. This information will help organizations, health care professionals, and families to address the health and social impacts of ASD.

Beyond the numbers, the national ASD surveillance system will provide us with qualitative data on the ASD population in Canada. It will enable us to compare trends within Canada and internationally so that we can work in identifying potential risk factors. Public reporting on ASD prevalence in Canada from the surveillance system is planned to begin in 2018.

The Government of Canada is also supporting a number of initiatives to improve the quality of life of individuals living with autism.

For example, we have made improvements to the child disability benefit and the Canada child benefit to support the families of children with disabilities, including ASD.

Under the leadership of the Minister of Sport and Persons with Disabilities, we are developing federal accessibility legislation. This legislation would aim to eliminate systemic barriers in our society. It would provide equal opportunities to all Canadians. We want our nation to be supportive, fair, and inclusive. The government is proud to demonstrate real leadership in supporting a fair and inclusive nation accessible to all Canadians.

Employment and Social Development Canada held public consultations to seek the public's input on various aspects of the legislation, including the overall goal and approach and whom it should cover. These consultations ended in February of this year. All input received will be considered during the development of this legislation.

In partnership with the Canadian Association for Community Living and the Canadian ASD Alliance, the government is also supporting the ready, willing, and able initiative which the member mentioned in his speech earlier. Through this program, we would see greater numbers of people with ASD joining the workforce. Our workforce would become more diverse and inclusive and we would see job vacancies filled across the country. Once fully implemented, this initiative would support up to 1,200 new jobs for persons with developmental disabilities, including ASD.

In addition, we are supporting the Sinneave Family Foundation and Autism Speaks Canada. Both of these organizations are helping to create employment opportunities for individuals with ASD by expanding vocational training programs across Canada.

The Public Health Agency of Canada will also be connecting with the ASD community to further explore ways we can work together on key issues.

As members can see, the Government of Canada is committed to helping to expand our evidence base on ASD, supporting Canadian researchers in studying the many facets of this disorder, and most important, working to improve the quality of life of those living with ASD and their families.

[Mike Lake, Conservative, Edmonton—Wetaskiwin, AB]

Madam Speaker, interestingly, the research chair, the surveillance program “ready, willing, and able”, and Community Works were all initiatives that we put in place when we were in government. I really would commend the late Jim Flaherty for having a heart for Canadians with disabilities in ensuring there was something for Canadians with developmental disabilities in every single budget during his time as finance minister.

I am going to ask a very straightforward question about the Canadian autism partnership. Dr. Jonathan Weiss was one of the people in the working group. The Sinneave Family Foundation, Autism Speaks, and CASDA were all represented on the working group that put the report forward. I will ask the hon. member straight out. Will the government be supporting this motion?