Debates of May 28th, 2019

Second reading and concurrence in Senate amendments

[Bardish Chagger, Liberal, Leader of the Government in the House of Commons]

Mr. Speaker, today is May 28 and the hon. Andrew Telegdi, who served in the House as the member of Parliament for Kitchener—Waterloo, was not only a friend but a mentor and family. My favourite quote of his that I appreciated was “My Canada is an inclusive Canada”.

When we talk about Bill C-81, I would love to hear from the member what she believes about inclusivity, that if this legislation is passed sooner than later, how it will benefit not only her community but communities across the country, that as much as it is only a step in the right direction, it is an important step that we should be able to take as soon as possible and why this legislation should pass sooner than later. I know that talking is important, but I believe that actions are more important and I would love to hear her perspective.

[Celina Caesar-Chavannes, Independent, Whitby, ON]

Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the opportunity to respond to the question from the hon. government House leader, whom I have had the tremendous opportunity to work with over the last three and a half years. She is a brilliant individual and, if I could be permitted to say so, I do love her.

She is absolutely right. My Canada is an inclusive Canada because this is what we are defined by. This is why this piece of legislation is a leadership moment for Canadians. This is why this legislation is not just a leadership moment for our 42nd Parliament; this is a leadership moment for all Canadians, for all businesses, all communities and all jurisdictions to look at what our federal government is doing and say, “Hey, I want to do a bit of that. I want to make my business more inclusive. How can I do that?” It is to ask the tough questions of how they can be a bit more.

With the Senate amendments around intersectionality, around putting timelines and around making sure we are held accountable, this is what makes this piece of legislation better. It is because there is a collaborative approach. It is because the government has accepted amendments. It is because we have listened to Canadians, to stakeholders, to Canadians who have written to us and to individuals from both sides of this chamber to make this piece of legislation better. This is what our democracy is about. It is about looking after the most vulnerable in our community. This is why I am here.

It is about understanding that the marginalized and those who feel that they are on the periphery of a political process can be involved and can actually see themselves, and not just through the cameras; through social media and through our voices, they can see themselves in here. Even though they are not here, they can see themselves through their members' voices. This is what we should be most proud of in being in this place.

I applaud the government for this piece of legislation and for accepting the amendments that the other place has brought forward.

[Robert Gordon Kitchen, Conservative, Souris—Moose Mountain, SK]

Mr. Speaker, I see the clock and it is extremely late. I appreciate that as I look around, I see many people who have been here all day. Although we cannot recognize them, I note they are here in Ottawa. I welcome them, and I want to thank them for everything they have done, as they have sat through this debate and listened to what we have put forward.

Before I get into my speech, I want to thank the member for Whitby for her comments, because she triggered me into thinking about something I discussed today.

Today I had an opportunity to meet with the Canadian Paralympic Committee. I met a gentleman by the name of Tony Walby, who is on the board of directors for the CPC and is also the chair of CPC athletes' council. We had a great discussion, and we talked about disabilities.

Mr. Walby was a judo athlete, and he unfortunately developed a visual and hearing impairment and was no longer able to compete as an athlete in judo. Now, after getting onto the CPC's board of directors, he is doing tremendous work with the organization.

In the conversation we had, we talked about disabilities. He said to me that disabled people do not want to be called “disabled”, and I agree with him 100%. Calling them “disabled” makes people believe there is an impairment and a challenge. They are not disabled. They are the same as everybody else in the world; they just happen to have a disability that impairs what they do. That is an important thing we need to point out to all Canadians.

I will start with that. I appreciate the comments I have heard tonight, and, again, I appreciate the comments from the member for Whitby, who spurred me to put that out there.

I am happy to be back here today to discuss amendments that were put forward by the Senate of Canada with respect to Bill C-81, an act to ensure a barrier-free Canada. It is always a pleasure to speak to important issues like this one, and I appreciate the work that has been done on the bill. I do think it will go a long way toward making a difference for Canadians living with disabilities.

The support evident from all parties gives many of us an opportunity to talk about some of the issues in the legislation that are important to each and every one of us.

When I first spoke about the bill in the fall, I had a few issues with it. Mainly, I felt as though it did not contain enough real, tangible measures to produce results for those in Canada who live with disabilities. The intentions were good; however, the legislation does not actually accomplish anything that will help people with disabilities and what they need. They wanted something that would have an impact on their lives, and I feel as though the amendments we are discussing today will help them going forward.

One of the biggest issues I had with the initial version of Bill C-81 is that I felt it was rushed. The Liberals took quite a long time in bringing this matter to Parliament, yet when the bill was first introduced, it fell short of many expectations that the Canadians with disabilities community had. Although the Liberals had years to consult, there were gaps in the legislation they put forward that needed to be addressed. While the bill is still not perfect, with many of my colleagues pointing out its many imperfections, I do feel that the amendments put forward by the upper house help to identify and rectify some of the gaps.

I am glad to see that one of the amendments made to the bill puts a specific timeline on the matter. By adding a specific year or period of time by which a Canada without barriers will be achieved, a sense of urgency is created. That urgency is necessary, as disabled people in Canada have been waiting many years for this legislation to become law. In this case, the bill requires a “Canada without barriers, on or before January 1, 2040.”

While this timeline might seem like a small part of this legislation, I feel that it is one of the most important aspects. Not only does it light a fire and force the federal government to get moving on the matter, but it also gives those who have been waiting for a Canada without barriers some hope that things will truly get done in the future.

I have always felt that an important part of what we do here in the House is to ensure that the outcomes of legislation we put forward are measurable. We want to be sure that we get results when we say we will get results, preferably before the deadline of January 1, 2040.

The one issue I do have with the timeline indicated in the amendments is that it is quite long. People in Canada who are living with disabilities want action and they want it now. There are people in this country who have lived their entire lives facing barriers each and every day and they want to know that their government is committed to addressing issues of accessibility in a timely manner. Setting a goal that is over 20 years in the future may give the impression that this is not as much of a priority as it should be.

We on this side of the House would have preferred deadline of 10 years, as we believe that it would be a reasonable timeline for achieving a Canada without barriers. We know that many times action does not begin until a deadline looms. We do not want this to be the case with removing barriers to accessibility, and the setting of the deadline 20 years down the road is concerning. I am hopeful that organizations will do everything to have accessibility measures in place long before that timeline expires.

One thing that we all hold dear in this beautiful country of ours is the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. It sets out what we as Canadians and people residing in Canada can come to expect in how we participate in society and what rights we have as individuals. A number of the amendments in Bill C-81 seek to ensure the following:

Nothing in this Act, including its purpose of the realization of a Canada without barriers, should be construed as requiring or authorizing any delay in the removal of barriers or the implementation of measures to prevent new barriers as soon as is reasonably possible.

Simply speaking, this means that no agency in Canada would be able to create and set standards that are inconsistent with what is set out in the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. Furthermore, if barriers to accessibility can be removed before the legislated timeline of January 2040, they absolutely should be. There is no justification for delay.

Another measure contained in the amendments to Bill C-81 that I feel is essential to the success of the bill is as follows:

persons with disabilities must be involved in the development and design of laws, policies, programs, services and structures.

This is key. As members of Parliament, it is our duty to consult and work with those who are affected by legislation that we put forward here in Ottawa. It is only logical that when it comes to creating a law that will lead to a Canada without barriers, we speak to those people who actually face the barriers.

It is one thing to consult with disabled Canadians, but it is another to have it enshrined in law that they must be involved in the development of public policy that affects their everyday lives. The only people who truly know what challenges they face and need to overcome on a daily basis are those who live with disabilities or care for someone with a disability. I am pleased that it will now be a requirement that this community have a voice at the table going forward.

Another amendment to Bill C-81 addresses intersectionality. Intersectionality is defined as “the complex, cumulative way in which the effects of multiple forms of discrimination...combine, overlap, or intersect, especially in the experiences of marginalized individuals or groups.” This may apply to many aspects of our identity, such as race, gender and class, and it certainly applies to people in Canada who live with a disability.

Initially, intersectionality was not a key part of Bill C-81. Many disability advocacy groups across the country called for this aspect of the bill to be strengthened, and I am happy to see it included in the proposed amendments.

While it would be wonderful to say that we live in a country where discrimination does not exist, we all know that it is unfortunately not the case. Canada is a progressive country, yet unfortunately, there will always be some level of discrimination present in our society. I feel that people living with disabilities in Canada absolutely understand that, because they face a level of discrimination that most members of the House, including me, will likely never experience. Any legislation that we put forward and expect to become law needs to address the fact that discrimination happens and is inappropriate and will not be tolerated.

The amendment that addresses intersectionality is necessary. By incorporating intersectionality into the measures outlined in Bill C-81, laws, policies, programs, services and structures will be required to take into account the intersectional forms of discrimination faced by persons living with disabilities.

Ultimately, organizations would have to recognize and account for intersectional discrimination when formulating their accessibility plans. This may not be easy, but it is what disabled people need and deserve. They have every right to participate in society, just as anyone else does. Unfortunately, many are all too familiar with the layers upon layers of discrimination they might face just doing things like going to work, running errands or going to an appointment. As I previously stated, many advocacy groups have called for the inclusion and strengthening of intersectionality in this bill. I am happy to see that the amendments have provided for that.

One amendment to this bill that I personally heard some feedback on is with respect to sign language. Some members here may know my personal history. As has already been indicated to people, I am hearing impaired as a result of a hit and run that I sustained as a teenager. I am fortunate that it is a partial hearing loss. Although I can still communicate with spoken language, over the years I have been slowly teaching myself sign language. However, one must use it in order to keep using it. Unfortunately, I have not had that opportunity, so I have failed in much of what I know, but I am learning more. I encourage everyone who is listening here today to continue to learn sign language given how important it is.

Being hearing impaired makes it extremely challenging to communicate, not only in crowds, but also where there is background noise. It is frustrating when all I can do is smile and nod as if I heard the person speaking to me. There is a huge mental challenge in dealing with this issue. It is one that I go through at many meetings, and I know that people with hearing disabilities are challenged with it day in and day out.

Invisible disabilities are not as widely talked about when discussing Canadians living with a disability. When I go around the riding, oftentimes I talk to students about getting involved and the great things we do in this country. I ask them if they think I am disabled. Every now and then there is one person who puts a hand up because he or she thinks it is a trick question, but most of them say no. Then I tell them my story. I try to point out to them the fact that there are many people in this world who have invisible disabilities that we do not know about and do not talk about.

While physical health is important, so is mental health. Every person, from every walk of life, deserves to feel valued, loved and respected. We all have different challenges that we must face. However, if we can accommodate a group of people who typically feel marginalized, and allow them to feel included and appreciated, that is never a bad thing. By passing legislation that would create a Canada without barriers, it is my hope that those within the disabled community will feel recognized and heard. We see them, we care about them and we want to do what we can to make their daily lives easier.

The amendment to Bill C-81 that concerns sign language is crucial. It includes and recognizes the use of American, Quebec and indigenous sign languages as the primary languages of communication used by deaf people in Canada. I am very glad that these languages have been included in this bill, as the deaf community is one that must be acknowledged when we discuss Canadians living with disabilities.

Some people do not realize there is more than one kind of sign language. There are many that exist around the world, similar to spoken languages. There are between 138 and 300 different types of sign languages used worldwide. The UN only recognizes 45 of them. Each language has its own unique grammar, syntax and vocabulary and are legitimate languages in their own right. They deserve to be given the same status and recognition as any spoken language or other sign language. Therefore, I am pleased to see that both the Quebec and indigenous sign languages have been given representation in this legislation, because we need to represent Canadians from coast to coast to coast, and not just those who might use the more common American sign language.

For the deaf community, using sign language can become part of a cultural identity. As a government, it is important that is acknowledged. We need to ensure there are high levels of standards for those who use sign language, whether it is ASL, Quebec sign language or an indigenous sign language. All Canadians should have the right to communicate in a way that works for them and to have their language recognized as legitimate and as having value.

Another component that was included in the amendments to this bill is one that would ensure the Canadian Transportation Agency, the CTA, cannot respond to complaints about barriers to accessibility by reducing existing human rights protections for passengers with disabilities. Those with disabilities, especially of a physical nature, understand how difficult travel can be. Air transportation in particular can be very cumbersome. Some cannot safely and confidently travel by plane at all due to such limitations as specialized wheelchairs and other necessary equipment.

I have a constituent who faces limitations when it comes to travel. I would like to read an excerpt from a letter that she sent to me, which outlines her struggles with travel. It reads, “My name is Kennan Dorgan and I live in your constituency. I commute from Grenfell to Regina three days per week to attend a fabulous program at the University of Regina called Astonished. My dream is to fly to Alaska to visit my sister. I have a complex physical disability and I use a wheelchair for mobility. I cannot sit independently from my wheelchair and airplanes do not have designated wheelchair spots. Every summer I spend at least 108 hours of challenging and exhausting driving time to visit with my sister in Alaska. A flight would take 15 to 20 hours.”

Her letter goes on to say, “Despite the oversight of both the CTA and Transport Canada, there are no provisions to improve accessibility to aircrafts for travellers who, because of their disabilities and for safety reasons, cannot sit in a standard airline passenger seat and must remain seated in their personal wheelchairs. These individuals are prevented from travelling any way except by land vehicles.”

This young lady spends over 108 hours in a van every year so that she can spend time with her family. In fact, she and her parents are currently preparing for their annual drive up to Alaska. They will be leaving within the next couple of weeks. While the amendments to Bill C-81 may not specifically address her issue, I do feel it is important to present real life situations that are being faced by real Canadians who live with a disability, yet want to take a family vacation just like anyone else.

I also met a lady from Vancouver a few months back while I was travelling with my wife. This lady had her disabled adult son with her. She graciously shared her experiences of travelling with her son. It is not an easy thing to do. He loved to travel, even with his severe disability, on ships and on planes. She had to have a team of family members with her to ensure that her son could be carried from point A to point B. Oftentimes, in his wheelchair he could not access certain areas of the ship. It was the same for any portion that required travel by plane.

She made it work, as do many families who care for someone who lives with a disability. However, I could see that it was a major struggle.

While Bill C-81 may not address that issue outright, I do think it is important to bring attention to it as the amendments do touch on the rights of the CTA. Over the years, I have heard from a number of Canadians who struggle with travel, and I do hope that this amendment can be a starting point to address that issue going forward.

We have heard from many Canadians about this legislation, and many groups that are promoting this legislation. I support that, and my colleagues around this House support that movement. This is a first step. It is a first step to put forward legislation which, as we see with the amendments that have been made by the Senate, we can improve and start with a base. However, the base is the base. It needs to be advanced and it needs to be advanced as quickly as possible. The faster we do this, the faster we include people with disabilities with all Canadians.

[Kate Young, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Science and Sport and to the Minister of Public Services and Procurement and Accessibility (Accessibility)]

Mr. Speaker, I want to thank my hon. colleague for talking about his own disability. I did not realize that he was hearing-impaired. It is an invisible disability, and one that so many Canadians deal with all the time.

He underscored how it is important that we move forward fast. Does the member not agree that Bill C-81 is really a huge step forward and that we must move forward for all people with disabilities in Canada?

[Robert Gordon Kitchen, Conservative, Souris—Moose Mountain, SK]

Mr. Speaker, I thank the member for being here today at this late hour to listen to the debates and the discussions of the many important issues that are out there.

She is right, in many aspects, that we do have this legislation now. Unfortunately, it has taken three and a half years to get to this stage. Unfortunately, we are continuing to sit here and look at this, when it should have been put forward as soon as we were elected in 2015. With that said, we are advancing, and as we start with this legislation, I look forward to moving forward on that.

My biggest concern is that, with the timeline being 2040, it gives the government an avenue to back away from doing things. That is not acceptable for disabled Canadians. I want to encourage the government to continue to push this forward and advance this legislation.

[Candice Bergen, Conservative, Portage—Lisgar, MB]

Mr. Speaker, I appreciate my hon. colleague's comments and especially his sharing his personal story and how he has sometimes struggled, but clearly he has been such a successful individual and such a great member of Parliament. I know we appreciate his contribution in our caucus and on our side.

I want to ask the member about children living with disabilities. He said he was a victim of a hit and run at a young age.

We introduced the registered disability savings plan, the RDSP, the first one of its kind in the world, which really helped caregivers who were concerned about their children, as well as young adults. I wonder if the member can talk a bit about what families are dealing with. That sounds negative, and I do not think it is negative. There is so much positive. Can he talk about what we can do?

We are hoping to win government in October; we are planning to. We want to carry on the legacy that the late Jim Flaherty left, whereby people who have a variety of abilities are the focus and are at the forefront of what we are doing, and their concerns are not just brought in when it is convenient or politically expedient.

What can we do to help families that are living with and dealing with disabilities, but have so many abilities and so much to contribute as families?

[Robert Gordon Kitchen, Conservative, Souris—Moose Mountain, SK]

Mr. Speaker, my House leader is right. I have heard a number of people talk about how nothing was done until this legislation came here. As she has pointed out, the late Jim Flaherty put forward, year after year, continuous steps to advance families and people with disabilities. The tax credit has been a tremendous asset for those families that have had to deal with that.

As I mentioned, many people I have talked to and many patients in my previous practice have come in and asked for ways to get assistance that would help them deal with the challenges they have.

I am happy to say that I am a brand new grandfather of a 13-week-old young girl named Zella. We always expect to see that the child is going to be perfect. Unfortunately, that does not happen. Unfortunately, throughout life, children may sustain something like I did and it makes a big challenge for those families, whether those families are dealt financial hardships, time hardships or employment hardships.

These are all steps that we need to continue to look at. We need to look at how we can step forward as we talk about this legislation and advance that, so that not only do we help the disabled people, but we help the families that are committed to their own life.

[Pat Kelly, Conservative, Calgary Rocky Ridge, AB]

Mr. Speaker, I listened to the question and answer. They once again raised the question of the disability tax credit which is a gateway to many other supports that disabled Canadians rely on. Throughout the debate we have heard the government congratulate itself on a variety of things beyond this bill which still has not yet passed this House. However, it would be generous to say that the government's track record on disabled Canadians is mixed.

I wonder if the member could comment on the disability tax credit. Has he heard from disabled Canadians who have lost their credit and thus risked losing other supports tied to it, including the disability tax savings plan for which one would have to refund money and lose the plan if one no longer qualified for the disability tax credit, which the government has withdrawn from many Canadians.

[Robert Gordon Kitchen, Conservative, Souris—Moose Mountain, SK]

Mr. Speaker, my hon. colleague is right. The disability tax credit that is in place to help Canadians is one on which I and many of my colleagues have received letters in particular from patients dealing with diabetes and type 1 diabetes and the challenges they have had as they move forward. Some people may say that those people are not disabled, but they are disabled. They are dealing with an issue that has a huge impact not only on their life but also on the lives of their family members.

As these people move forward and step up to the plate, they fill out the paperwork that they have done in the past and now, all of a sudden, the present government has changed the rules and made some statements that have resulted in changes to their appeals. Now they are appealing and it is a big challenge for them. It puts a lot of stress on them. It puts a lot of mental stress on them and affects them in many different ways on how it is approved. The doctors who are dealing with them fill out the forms appropriately and put in the proper information. That should be looked at, as opposed to making a statement that comes from a civil servant.

[Jenny Kwan, NDP, Vancouver East, BC]

Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the member's comments about his challenges with respect to his accident, and of course the stories about his constituents as well.

In an effort to ensure that accessibility is made more readily available for people with all kinds of disabilities, would the member support the idea of ensuring that there is one-stop access for disability benefit programs within the federal government? Instead of making a person apply multiple times to different departments for those programs, they would only have to do it once and submit, for example, one doctor's verification letter to indicate the disability that the person is identified with. It would make it easier for people to access those very necessary programs.

[Robert Gordon Kitchen, Conservative, Souris—Moose Mountain, SK]

Mr. Speaker, I do want to point out to my colleagues who have said kind words about my personal life that I usually do not speak about my personal life. That is something that happened to me many years ago. As I said, I do not consider myself disabled. I do not want people to look at me as if I am disabled. I have a disability but I am just like everybody else. I think that is what all disabled people expect and would like in this country. With that being said, I appreciate her comments.

I think it is important to recognize that when disabled persons are putting in forms to insurance agencies or wherever it may be, there is a huge challenge when they have to continually fill out forms. They fill out one form, then go back and get another form, and another form and another form. It is a big challenge not only timewise but also emotionally. It has a big impact.

[The Deputy Speaker, Conservative, Bruce Stanton]

Before we go to resuming debate and the hon. member for Leeds—Grenville—Thousand Islands and Rideau Lakes, I will let the hon. member know that there are only about 10 minutes remaining in the time for Government Orders for the end of the day today, but he will have the remaining minutes in his time allotted when the House next gets back to debate on the question.

The hon. member for Leeds—Grenville—Thousand Islands and Rideau Lakes.

[Michael Barrett, Conservative, Leeds—Grenville—Thousand Islands and Rideau Lakes, ON]

Mr. Speaker, I am honoured to rise today and speak to Bill C-81, the barrier-free Canada act.

This proposed act aims to make Canada more accessible for all people but especially for those with physical or developmental disabilities. An act like this is essentially good. It works to ensure and enshrine the dignity of the human person. So often today we find that the inherent dignity of the human person is cast aside for various reasons, perhaps out of ignorance. More often than not, the victims of society's disregard for human dignity are those among us who have to deal with a physical or developmental disability.

I would like to share my earliest and first experience with someone outside of my house who has become family to me. I call him my brother. His name is Ian McCluskey.

Ian is 29 years old. He is a high school graduate. He is a brother, a son and in the last year, a very proud new uncle to Monrow McCluskey. Ian is compassionate and hilarious with a sharp wit. He is focused and smart. Ian also happens to have been born with Down's syndrome, but he is never less than, and he is a wonderful man. He is my brother and a really great guy. He has taught me so much about myself. Ian adds so much to the lives of everyone he has gone to school with, worked with, his biological family and his extended family, of which I am fortunate that Ian includes me as part of. He is certainly deserving of all the dignity of any person.

A society and a government's recognition of the dignity of the human person is a foundational building block for a just and moral society. This must be paired with the rejection of the idea that some people are worth less than others and can so easily be rejected and cast to the peripheries. That is why the bill before us is so important, because people are inherently good and worthwhile.

The Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms guarantees the right to equal protection and equal benefit of the law without discrimination and, in particular, discrimination on the basis of disability. The Canadian Human Rights Act recognizes that all individuals should have an opportunity equal with other individuals to make for themselves the lives that they are able and wish to have and to have their needs accommodated without discrimination and, in particular, discrimination on the basis of disability. However, what are rights and freedoms, particularly human rights, without recognition of the value of people and their inherent dignity as human persons?

Sure, we can point at the natural law saying that as humans we have a set of universal rights that have always been dictated by our nature and the nature of the world, or we can say that we have rights because the state prescribes them to us. Either way, the fact remains that we must know the dignity of the human person if we are to be a just and moral society.

Over the last century, we have seen exactly what happens when a state throws human dignity away. We know the atrocities undertaken by violent regimes. Under those regimes, the people that this very bill pays special attention to would have been disposed of, because they were seen as worthless. Many members of the House were alive when this was happening in Cambodia. People with physical or developmental disabilities were killed wholesale. It is not like this was some far-off time. We do not have to try to imagine. The Cambodian genocide happened in the 1970s. Therefore, we do not have to think too hard or too far back. We know what it is like when the dignity of the human person is cast away. It happened, and we need to strive to make sure that it never happens again.

A massive part of making society more accessible is to remove barriers to community. People find their highest good when in community and are able to feel that they belong. Early in my life, in my own home, I learned from the greatest teachers I have ever had or will ever have, my mom Anne and my dad Chris. My mom is visually impaired and has dealt with blindness her whole life. In spite of the challenges that has presented her with, she is a university graduate and brilliant woman who has taught me more than any textbook or teacher on any number of subjects. I am sure my mom learns more and reads more in a week than I do over many months.

One very important thing my mom taught me about was this very subject: the value of community. My mom served as a director on the L'Arche board in my community. As many will know, L'Arche is the creation of Jean Vanier. He was able to experience this through his work with the intellectually and developmentally disabled before he recently passed away. He was the son of a governor general. After visiting asylums in France and seeing the suffering of the patients who were wholly excluded from society, Jean Vanier set out to build a community where people with and without intellectual disabilities could live and work alongside one another as equals.

His first community started in a rundown house northeast of Paris that was without electricity or running water. Vanier said of the two men who came to live with him in the first house, “What was surprising to begin with was Raphael and Felipe had both been terribly humiliated, pushed away, put into an institution. Their families didn’t want them anymore, and so I welcomed them. And then, this gradual discovery of how they were opening up, rejoicing, and becoming someone.”

That first house eventually expanded, becoming the first of 154 communities across 38 countries that today form the network that I previously referenced as L'Arche International. By creating a barrier-free environment where these people could work and belong, Jean Vanier created a lesson for all of us, especially in this House, that lesson brought to me very early in life by my mom, a great teacher.

This bill is a step in the right direction, but comes after years of government foot dragging. The slow pace and generally lethargic attitude of the government when it comes to important legislation is, I would say, astonishing. That has had a negative effect on many people, like the people this bill makes provisions for.

We can look at the record of the previous Conservative government mentioned by the speakers before me this evening to see effective legislation that was passed in successive years to help people with disabilities. That Conservative government established registered disability savings plans. These plans allowed parents and the families of children with disabilities to set aside money for the future in an account where it can grow tax-free until it is needed.

I see that I have just a minute left before we adjourn. I am not through all of the remarks I would like to deliver, but I will say that this bill begins to address the dignity of the human person and that this is truly important. Human beings rely on all sorts of relationships, recognizing the necessity of collaboration. The spirit of this bill is commendable and a step in the right direction. It recognizes the inherent human dignity in people with physical or developmental disabilities and it is an important step in the right direction for all of us.

[The Deputy Speaker, Conservative, Bruce Stanton]

The hon. member for Leeds—Grenville—Thousand Islands and Rideau Lakes will have 10 minutes remaining in the time for his remarks when the House next gets back to debate on the question that is before the House.

Notice of Closure Motion

[Bardish Chagger, Liberal, Leader of the Government in the House of Commons]

Mr. Speaker, I give notice that with respect to consideration of the Senate amendments to Bill C-81, an act to ensure a barrier-free Canada, at the next sitting of the House a minister of the Crown shall move, pursuant to Standing Order 57, that debate be not further adjourned.

[The Deputy Speaker, Conservative, Bruce Stanton]

I thank the Government House Leader for this additional notice.

It being 12 a.m., pursuant to an order made on Tuesday, May 28, 2019, the House stands adjourned until later this day at 2 p.m., pursuant to Standing Order 24(1).

(The House adjourned at 12 a.m.)