House of Commons Hansard #283 of the 42nd Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament's site.) The word of the day was 2018.

Topics

Budget Implementation Act, 2018, No. 1Government Orders

7:10 p.m.

Some hon. members

Nay.

Budget Implementation Act, 2018, No. 1Government Orders

7:10 p.m.

Liberal

The Speaker Liberal Geoff Regan

In my opinion the yeas have it.

And five or more members having risen:

(The House divided on the motion, which was agreed to on the following division:)

Vote #652

Budget Implementation Act, 2018, No. 1Government Orders

7:15 p.m.

Liberal

The Speaker Liberal Geoff Regan

I declare the motion carried. Accordingly the bill stands referred to the Standing Committee on Finance.

(Bill read the second time and referred to a committee)

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

Indigenous AffairsAdjournment Proceedings

7:20 p.m.

NDP

Sheila Malcolmson NDP Nanaimo—Ladysmith, BC

Mr. Speaker, I believe this is the fifth time I have stood in the chamber to ask why the Liberal government would not have removed all sex discrimination against indigenous women from the Indian Act. The Liberals had multiple opportunities proposed by the Senate and my colleague from the NDP, which on National Aboriginal Day, of all days, the government and the Conservatives voted down. They did a half-way measure and said that they would consult on removing the sex discrimination for indigenous women.

To be clear what this means is that in the past indigenous women who married white men lost their Indian status, which then affects all of their subsequent children. There is a not a concomitant penalty for indigenous men who marry white women. It is an obvious case of discrimination and has been adjudicated in Canada's courts for 40 years.

Therefore, Ms. Jeannette Corbiere-Lavell, Ms. Yvonne Bedard, Senator Sandra Lovelace-Nicholas, Dr. Sharon McIvor, Dr. Lynn Gehl, and Senator Lillian Dyck fought this hard in the courts and won. The courts ordered the government to act. Instead, it took the narrowest measure, the most narrow interpretation of what it had to do.

Again, on Wednesday night last week, I asked the parliamentary secretary why the government believed it was necessary to consult on whether indigenous women should have full human rights. To my amazement, she said, “We are restoring rights to indigenous women...that cannot be denied as it is clear in the legislation....I would ask the member opposite to understand and accept that.” The famous six indigenous women who fought this in court do not support what the government has done. They consider it a half measure.

To lead up to my question, where once again I will ask the government why it is necessary to consult on whether indigenous women should have full human rights, I will read today's blog from the Native Women's Association.

But here’s the catch – Bill S-3’s provisions haven’t come into force with the bill’s passage; in fact, there is no fixed date for their implementation.

Not only does this leave thousands of Indigenous persons in limbo, but the bill also neglects to address several other forms of legislated sex-based discrimination: the existing hierarchy between men with 6(1)(a) status and re-instated Bill C-31 women with less conferrable 6(1)(c) status as well as issues related to sperm donors, surrogacy and adoption, such as a child adopted into an Indigenous family who receives ‘higher’ status than an Indigenous child born into an Indigenous family.

There is more. It is a great read. I do recommend it to all parliamentarians. NWAC goes on to say that:

But don’t worry – the government will be engaging in consultations with Indigenous groups to discuss barriers and discrimination related to status registration. That is to say, the government is consulting Indigenous peoples on just how much discrimination against them is acceptable.

Therefore, one more time, the sixth time at least, I ask this. Why on earth would a feminist government committed to a nation-to-nation relationship built on respect continue to discriminate against indigenous women in our country?

Indigenous AffairsAdjournment Proceedings

7:20 p.m.

Labrador Newfoundland & Labrador

Liberal

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

Mr. Speaker, I rise today on the traditional territory of the Algonquin people to answer this question again from my hon. colleague from Nanaimo—Ladysmith.

We are a strong feminist government, and we are proud to be such a strong feminist government. Not only that, we are the first government to ever accept and enter into full nation-to-nation co-operation with indigenous people in this country, and we are doing so totally on the premise of respect.

Our government is committed to ensuring equity for all women in Canada, and that includes ensuring sex-based equity for women with respect to registration under the Indian Act. Our government is pleased that Bill S-3, which finally eliminates all sex-based discrimination from registration provisions in the Indian Act, has now received royal assent and is law. That itself is a tremendous accomplishment, and I would expect the member opposite would be saying that the government is on the right track. More needs to be done, and that is why I am here this evening to tell her that more will be done.

This is a step toward reconciliation for first nations' women's rights, as well as for respect and equality in this country. Bill S-3 responded to the Descheneaux decision, but it went beyond the charter considerations that were addressed in the case. This included sex discrimination and circumstances prior to 1951. In fact, the bill remedies sex-based inequities dating back to 1869.

While the balance of Bill S-3 was brought into force immediately after royal assent, the clause that deals with the 1951 cut-off will be brought into force after the conclusion of co-designed consultations. That is the piece that the member opposite does not agree with. She does not believe that we should consult with indigenous people in this country on how that will happen. However, we will be tabling and updating a co-designed consultation process on the broad-based Indian Act registration and membership reform in Parliament next month. She will get to see how that process will be launched in June of this year.

The government has also made it very clear that consultations and partnership are essential prerequisites for any major changes that involve first nations in this country. That is what we call nation-to-nation working together. This approach is in keeping with our government's commitment to renewing our relationship with indigenous people, one based on recognition of rights, respect, co-operation, and partnership. We will not throw that out the window simply because the member opposite cannot wait to do what is right.

In fact, our consultations are focused on identifying what measures and resources will be required to do this right, and working in partnership to develop a comprehensive implementation plan. It has nothing to do with consulting on gender equity.

Indigenous AffairsAdjournment Proceedings

7:25 p.m.

NDP

Sheila Malcolmson NDP Nanaimo—Ladysmith, BC

Mr. Speaker, with respect to my colleague, I will point out once again that the six women who fought this in court for 40 years do not agree with the government's approach. The Native Women's Association of Canada does not agree with the government's approach. Just last week, the Ontario Native Women's Association reminded many parliamentarians that they do not agree with the government's approach. There is no fixed date for the implementation of the bill. The 1951 cut-off is still in place, and the government voted down the proposed paragraph 6(1)(a) “all the way” amendment, which was supported in the Senate and by my colleague and urged by the women who have the most to lose and have been fighting this for four decades.

I promise that this is not my opposition; this is what we are hearing from indigenous leadership. I wish the member opposite would understand and respect that.

Indigenous AffairsAdjournment Proceedings

7:25 p.m.

Liberal

Yvonne Jones Liberal Labrador, NL

Mr. Speaker, what we respect is the process and the relationship that we have with indigenous people in Canada. That relationship is built on respect. It is built on dialogue. It is built on talking to one another.

I want to be very clear that as I said, our consultations will be focused on identifying further measures or resources that are going to be required to do this right, working in partnership with indigenous governments across Canada to develop a comprehensive implementation plan. This way of proceeding is responsible and prudent and will ensure that the government implements this measure in a way that eliminates or mitigates any unintended negative consequences that could happen for communities, for indigenous governments, and for individuals.

It is fair to say that our government has gone where no other government has ever gone on gender equity for indigenous women.

HealthAdjournment Proceedings

7:30 p.m.

NDP

Sheri Benson NDP Saskatoon West, SK

Mr. Speaker, it pains me to once again ask the government about its commitment to health funding in my home province of Saskatchewan.

Five months ago, on World AIDS Day, I asked the government if it would declare a public health state of emergency in Saskatchewan, as our doctors have been calling for, for over a year. Saskatchewan has the highest rates of HIV in Canada, and 79% of those newly diagnosed are indigenous people. Instead of heeding the calls for action, the federal government has cut funding for some of the organizations that are doing the important work of education and prevention not just in cities like Saskatoon, but also in northern communities.

As the media have reported, two Saskatchewan organizations have been left in the dark about why their federal funding was cut for AIDS and HIV outreach work. AIDS Saskatoon provided services to central and northern Saskatchewan. Together, the two organizations provided services to a significant percentage of Saskatchewan. AIDS Saskatoon and All Nations Hope in Regina have had a combined total of $643,000 of federal funding cuts as of March 31, and they are not really sure why.

The government has not bothered to explain why it cut funding to one-third of all AIDS organizations. Given the growing number of HIV infections in Saskatchewan, these cuts are short-sighted and counterproductive. All Nations Hope had $350,000 cut in federal funding while AIDS Saskatoon had $293,000 cut in funding. The AIDS Saskatoon affiliated office has been in La Ronge for five years, and its executive director, Jason Mercredi, said it was heartbreaking to learn the federal funding would be pulled. “We're pretty choked we won't be able to continue some of those activities”, he said.

This is part of a wider series of cuts to HIV organizations across Canada. Thirty-three per cent of all AIDS service organizations across Canada have lost their federal funding. According to information released from the Government of Saskatchewan, the province's HIV rate of those newly diagnosed with HIV in 2016, 14.5 per 100,000 people, is two times higher than the national average. There were also 170 new cases in 2016, with 10 of those people living in the Mamawetan Churchill River health region, which included La Ronge. “We're in the middle of an HIV epidemic”, Mercredi has said.

As the federal government develops an updated national framework to guide Canada's response to HIV and other sexually transmitted blood-borne infections, one key thing is missing: a commitment to an adequately funded, made-in-Canada strategy. In fact, so far there has been no commitment even to simply reverse the chronic underfunding of the HIV response in Canada, now entering its 15th year. The funding erosion continues even as Canada has made international commitments to HIV treatment and prevention efforts with a view to achieving the global goal of ending AIDS in 2030. Canada's HIV response has clear gaps that need to be addressed urgently. Lives and public health are at risk.

It is time for the federal government to restore the diverted and lapsed resources that are so desperately needed. HIV is not over, especially in Saskatchewan. How can the government cut funding for such important work in the face of a worsening epidemic?

HealthAdjournment Proceedings

7:30 p.m.

Thunder Bay—Rainy River Ontario

Liberal

Don Rusnak LiberalParliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Indigenous Services

Mr. Speaker, I would like to acknowledge that we are gathered on the traditional lands of the Algonquin people.

As the Prime Minister has said, there is no relationship more important to Canada than the relationship with indigenous peoples. Our government is deeply committed to addressing HIV/AIDS and hepatitis C in Canada, including in first nation communities in Saskatchewan. Budget 2017 included initial investments of $37.5 million over five years to support the prevention and control of HIV and hepatitis C among first nation and Inuit communities. Our government is also investing an additional $3.35 million in 2017-18 to directly support first nation communities in Saskatchewan.

Further to this, our government has been working closely with first nation partners, communities, and leadership in support of implementing know your status initiatives within Saskatchewan. Know your status is a community developed, client-based approach that brings sexually transmitted or blood-borne infection-related services to locations that are best for the client. The know your status model employs a multidisciplinary, multisectoral, and cross-jurisdictional approach, making it easier for clients to receive the support they need.

I am proud to say that by 2021, our government will have nearly doubled the investment in know your status to support the health of first nations communities in Saskatchewan. In Saskatchewan there are currently 23 local testing sites, 19 harm reduction sites, and 13 mobile specialized community health nursing and outreach services.

Measurable indicators have been set to ensure support of existing fully implemented programs, completing the development of partially implemented programs, and supporting community readiness. In 2016, the number of HIV tests in Saskatchewan increased by 11 % among first nations, and the number of harm reduction sites increased by 27%.

Our government strongly believes that indigenous families should have seamless access to health services provided by both the federal and provincial governments to make sure that nobody slips through the cracks. To achieve this, the non-insured health benefits program provides first nations and Inuit with medical transportation to access medically necessary health services that are not available locally. Once a patient reaches a provincially run facility, inter-facility transfers that are necessary to the patient's care are paid for by most provinces.

The closure of the Saskatchewan Transportation Company falls within provincial jurisdiction. The department is aware of the challenges with access to transportation in some areas of the province as a result of this closure. Departmental officials have worked with new transportation vendors in some areas to secure provider arrangements. Funding has been provided to some communities to purchase and operate vans designated for medical travel.

HealthAdjournment Proceedings

7:35 p.m.

NDP

Sheri Benson NDP Saskatoon West, SK

Mr. Speaker, I want to ask my colleague to hold his government to account. It is unconscionable, given the statistics, to remove a third of the funding for these programmes without any real explanation or any other replacement in place. In the face of the undeniable evidence that HIV rates are rising in Saskatchewan, we should be investing more, not just sort of moving it around the province.

The government decided to cut funding to some of the most effective outreach and prevention programs that existed in the province. I believe the minister needs to answer for that, and so far, we have not received a one word of explanation. To add insult to injury, the government has done nothing to mitigate the devastating impact of the provincial government's move to sell off the STC.

On January 31, the hon. Minister of Innovation promised to work with me and my office to address this issue in a meaningful way. I have not heard a word since. How much longer do the people of Saskatchewan have to wait for the government to act?

HealthAdjournment Proceedings

7:35 p.m.

Liberal

Don Rusnak Liberal Thunder Bay—Rainy River, ON

Mr. Speaker, our government continues to provide medical transportation for first nations, regardless of where they live, through the non-insured health benefits program.

I would like to stress the importance of the efforts of the first nations in Saskatchewan in the development of the successful know your status model of health service delivery. The core components of know your status are testing, specialized nursing, outreach, harm reduction, and prevention. The complementary components include mental health and addictions services, primary care and lab services, and linking with infectious disease specialists.

I am pleased to share that because of our government's collaboration with first nation partners, there is rising evidence of Saskatchewan first nation communities achieving tremendous progress, and even exceeding the UNAIDS target that by 2020, 90% of all people living with HIV will know their HIV status, that 90% of all people with diagnosed HIV infection will receive sustained antiretroviral therapy, and that 90% of all people receiving antiretroviral—

HealthAdjournment Proceedings

7:35 p.m.

Liberal

The Assistant Deputy Speaker Liberal Anthony Rota

The hon. member for Drummond.

JusticeAdjournment Proceedings

7:35 p.m.

NDP

François Choquette NDP Drummond, QC

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to speak once again about an issue concerning our official languages.

On December 1, 2017, I asked the Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada an important question about an internal Department of Justice report that the government had been hiding since March 2017. We had been waiting for that report, which had not been publicly released. What was hidden in that internal report and why did the government want to keep it under wraps?

The report reveals that between 2008 and 2018, consecutive Conservative and Liberal governments diverted over $40 million from the Contraventions Act fund that was supposed to be spent on the roadmap for official languages. As a result, that money, which should have been invested to improve access to justice through the roadmap for official languages, was spent elsewhere. It is extremely disappointing that that money was not invested in our official language minority communities. Many people were surprised and wanted answers.

With that in mind, we asked for some clarification on this situation and called on the new Minister of Canadian Heritage to come up with a plan to make sure that this shortfall is reinvested in the next action plan for official languages, specifically the 2018-23 plan.

The Fédération des associations des juristes d'expression française wrote to the Minister of Justice to ask her to explain this situation, to take action, and to do something to address the situation. She did not respond. In 2016, the Réseau national de formation en justice asked Canadian Heritage questions about what was happening with the Contraventions Act fund. This organization wanted to know whether monies from this fund had been spent on official languages. There was no response. Access to justice in both of Canada's official languages is already difficult and this only compounds the problem. There are still many challenges to overcome.

For example, we still do not have a law to ensure that Supreme Court justices are bilingual and that they can properly understand, speak, and read both official languages.

I tabled a bill to address that. Unfortunately, the Liberals voted against it because they said they already had a policy to that effect. A policy, however, can be changed with the snap of a finger or it can just be ignored. We have seen other files where policy has not been followed. That is why we need legislation. The December 2017 report of the Standing Committee on Official Languages called for justice to be done in both official languages. It rightly called for the Supreme Court to be bilingual and that this be enshrined in law. It also called on the government to stop diverting the $40 million that was to be used to improve access to justice. I really want to get some answers about this matter.

JusticeAdjournment Proceedings

7:40 p.m.

Eglinton—Lawrence Ontario

Liberal

Marco Mendicino LiberalParliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada

Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank the hon. member for giving me the opportunity to clear up a misunderstanding regarding the Contraventions Act fund.

The contraventions regime is an alternative to the summary conviction procedure set out in the Criminal Code for prosecuting certain minor federal offences. The provinces and territories, which already had ticketing systems, came to an agreement with the federal government to implement and enforce the contravention regime on the federal government's behalf. Since the provinces and territories are acting on behalf of the federal government, they must ensure that the language rights of offenders are respected when issuing and managing federal contravention tickets.

The Contraventions Act fund provides the provinces and territories with the funding required to meet these legal obligations. In other words, the sole purpose of Contraventions Act fund is to enable the Department of Justice to meet its legal obligations when minor offences are prosecuted outside the procedure set out in the Criminal Code.

The provinces and territories can receive this financial assistance only once they have signed a general agreement for the enforcement of the Contraventions Act. There is a surplus in the fund because some provinces are not prepared to implement the regime or to sign an agreement. However, our government, through the Department of Justice, has worked and will continue to work diligently with the provinces and territories to ensure that the contraventions regime is implemented across the country.

These efforts are not in vain. Newfoundland and Labrador recently signed an agreement to implement the regime starting at the beginning of 2018. Members must understand that, unlike other funding programs for official languages, the Contraventions Act fund was not created in order to promote the vitality of official language communities. It was created so that the Department of Justice could fulfill its legal obligations to offenders.

The Contraventions Act fund was never designed to help federal institutions fulfill their duties under subsections 41(1) and 41(2) of Part VII of the Official Languages Act, entitled “Advancement of English and French”. At no time did the Department of Justice promise to use this fund to promote access to justice in both official languages, which it would not have been permitted to do. That being said, through the access to justice in both official languages support fund, the Department of Justice is fully committed to enhancing the vitality of both official languages and the communities that embody them, enabling them to contribute fully to Canadian society.

Through this plan, the government remains committed to official languages. The plan proposes an additional sum of $499.2 million, above our government's current investments totalling $2.2 billion. Our government is taking its responsibilities with regard to access—

JusticeAdjournment Proceedings

7:45 p.m.

Liberal

The Assistant Deputy Speaker Liberal Anthony Rota

Order. The hon. member for Drummond.

JusticeAdjournment Proceedings

7:45 p.m.

NDP

François Choquette NDP Drummond, QC

Mr. Speaker, I cannot believe what the parliamentary secretary has just said.

The action plan for official languages clearly states that the Contraventions Act fund is meant to improve access to justice in both official languages. The same goes for the infamous policy. If the action plan for official languages is being set aside, then where are we headed? Why even make plans in the first place? If it is part of the plan, I should hope it would be followed.

Furthermore, the Minister of Canadian Heritage's new action plan for official languages promises an additional $10 million over five years for the access to justice in both official languages support fund. However, the fund has been depleted of $40 million over 10 years. Something does not add up. There is a gap that will have to be made up.

JusticeAdjournment Proceedings

7:45 p.m.

Liberal

Marco Mendicino Liberal Eglinton—Lawrence, ON

Mr. Speaker, it is important to understand the objective of the Contraventions Act fund, as well as the compulsory nature of the measures it establishes within the court system. Unlike other funding programs, the Contraventions Act fund was not created to advance another departmental direction or to contribute to the promotion or development of official language minority communities. Rather, it was created to enable the Minister of Justice to fulfill his or her legal obligations to offenders.

JusticeAdjournment Proceedings

7:45 p.m.

Liberal

The Assistant Deputy Speaker Liberal Anthony Rota

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

(The House adjourned at 7:49 p.m.)