House of Commons Hansard #11 of the 43rd Parliament, 2nd Session. (The original version is on Parliament's site.) The word of the day was training.

Topics

Oral QuestionsPoints of OrderOral Questions

3:15 p.m.

Winnipeg North Manitoba

Liberal

Kevin Lamoureux LiberalParliamentary Secretary to the President of the Queen’s Privy Council for Canada and to the Leader of the Government in the House of Commons

Mr. Speaker, I have a point of order on that matter. I know there was a bit of concern regarding MPs being on the government side in the public gallery, and there might have been comments coming from that section. I wonder if it might be best that, if there is an overflow, members consider going to their respective sides or, as you suggested, being quiet in the public gallery as it allows better focus on the chamber floor.

Oral QuestionsPoints of OrderOral Questions

3:15 p.m.

Liberal

The Speaker Liberal Anthony Rota

I will comment on that, if members will indulge me. I noticed a couple of whips, and one whip in particular, commenting to his people and trying to keep them quiet. It seemed to work, so there is co-operation on both sides and I want to thank everyone for that.

Are there any other points of order before we continue?

Interparliamentary DelegationsRoutine Proceedings

3:15 p.m.

Liberal

Marc Serré Liberal Nickel Belt, ON

Mr. Speaker, pursuant to Standing Order 34(1), I have the honour to present to the House, in both official languages, two reports of the Canadian Section of ParlAmericas.

The first report concerns the fourth gathering of the ParlAmericas' Parliamentary Network on Climate Change that was held in Paramaribo, Suriname, in August 2019.

The second report concerns the United Nations Climate Change Conference, COP 25, held in Madrid, Spain, from December 1 to 3, 2019.

Interparliamentary DelegationsRoutine Proceedings

3:15 p.m.

NDP

Peter Julian NDP New Westminster—Burnaby, BC

Mr. Speaker, there has been discussion among the parties, and this is supported by MPs from all parties, so if you seek it you should find unanimous consent for the following motion:

I move that, in the opinion of the House, the government should designate the month of September every year as National Recovery Awareness Month to recognize and support Canadians recovering from addiction, and to demonstrate that recovery from addiction is possible, attainable and sustainable.

Interparliamentary DelegationsRoutine Proceedings

3:15 p.m.

Liberal

The Speaker Liberal Anthony Rota

This being a hybrid sitting of the House, for the sake of clarity, I will only ask those who are opposed to the motion to express their disagreement.

Interparliamentary DelegationsRoutine Proceedings

3:15 p.m.

Some hon. members

No.

Interparliamentary DelegationsRoutine Proceedings

3:15 p.m.

Liberal

The Speaker Liberal Anthony Rota

We do not have unanimous consent.

EqualizationPetitionsRoutine Proceedings

3:15 p.m.

Conservative

Tom Kmiec Conservative Calgary Shepard, AB

Mr. Speaker, I am up again on behalf of my constituents.

My first petition is again on equalization. Petitioners are drawing the attention of the Government of Canada and asking to immediately work with the Government of Alberta to address the equalization program's unfair treatment of Alberta and ensure a fair deal for Albertans within Confederation.

IranPetitionsRoutine Proceedings

3:15 p.m.

Conservative

Tom Kmiec Conservative Calgary Shepard, AB

Mr. Speaker, my second petition is from petitioners in my riding. They are drawing the attention of the Government of Canada and asking it to immediately implement a Conservative motion, passed by Parliament in 2018, to list Iran's Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps as a terrorist organization, that fair compensation be paid to the families by the Iranian government, and that Canada repatriate the remains.

The EnvironmentPetitionsRoutine Proceedings

3:15 p.m.

NDP

Richard Cannings NDP South Okanagan—West Kootenay, BC

Mr. Speaker, I stand here once again to present another petition from young people across my riding of South Okanagan—West Kootenay and from the adjacent riding, my neighbours in Kootenay—Columbia.

These young people are extremely concerned about the accelerating impacts of climate change and wonder whether they will be able to thrive in such an uncertain future. They point out that Canada's climate targets are completely inadequate and that continued subsidization of the oil sector is sending us in the wrong direction. They call for meaningful, legislated climate targets, an effective carbon tax, and redirecting fossil fuel subsidies into jobs and training for renewable energy systems, energy efficiency and low-carbon transportation.

AbortionPetitionsRoutine Proceedings

3:20 p.m.

Conservative

Brad Vis Conservative Mission—Matsqui—Fraser Canyon, BC

Mr. Speaker, petitioners in my riding call on the government to address sex-selective abortion. Sex-selective abortion is antithetical to our commitment to equality between men and women. A 2019 Dart and Maru/Blue poll conducted for the National Post showed that 84% of Canadians believe that it should be illegal to have an abortion if the family does not want the child to be a certain sex.

International organizations including the World Health Organization, United Nations Women and United Nations Children's Fund have identified unequal sex ratios at birth as a growing problem. Canada's health care profession recognizes sex-selective abortion as a problem, as well. Therefore, the petitioners in my riding call on the Government of Canada and the House of Commons to pass a Criminal Code prohibition of sex-selective abortion.

Human Organ TraffickingPetitionsRoutine Proceedings

3:20 p.m.

Conservative

Rosemarie Falk Conservative Battlefords—Lloydminster, SK

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to present this petition from Canadians across Canada, not necessarily in my riding. They are petitioning to bring to the government's attention that they have an increased concern regarding international trafficking of human organs. We know this is something that happens globally. It is a great opportunity for the Government of Canada to take a strong stance. We heard numerous times over question period that the government takes a strong stance on the world stage.

These petitioners want to make sure the Parliament of Canada will move quickly on proposed legislation to amend the Criminal Code and the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act to prohibit Canadians from travelling abroad to acquire human organs removed without consent, or as a result of a financial transaction, and to render inadmissible to Canada any and all permanent residents or foreign nationals who have participated in these acts.

HealthPetitionsRoutine Proceedings

3:20 p.m.

Conservative

Luc Berthold Conservative Mégantic—L'Érable, QC

Mr. Speaker, it is my pleasure to present a petition signed by Canadians who want to draw the attention of the House of Commons to their concern for the physical health of many Canadians because many Canadians use self-care options including over-the-counter products and because those Canadians want more information about the options and restrictions regarding self-care options. They are calling on Parliament to instruct the Standing Committee on Health to undertake a comprehensive study of the impact of uninsured self-care products and services and to evaluate the regulatory barriers which exist for those wishing to access them.

I am presenting this petition on behalf of these citizens.

Questions on the Order PaperRoutine Proceedings

3:20 p.m.

Winnipeg North Manitoba

Liberal

Kevin Lamoureux LiberalParliamentary Secretary to the President of the Queen’s Privy Council for Canada and to the Leader of the Government in the House of Commons

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

Questions on the Order PaperRoutine Proceedings

3:20 p.m.

Liberal

The Speaker Liberal Anthony Rota

Is that agreed?

Questions on the Order PaperRoutine Proceedings

3:20 p.m.

Some hon. members

Agreed.

The House resumed from October 2 consideration of the motion that Bill C-3, An Act to amend the Judges Act and the Criminal Code, be read the second time and referred to a committee.

Judges ActGovernment Orders

3:20 p.m.

Oakville North—Burlington Ontario

Liberal

Pam Damoff LiberalParliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Indigenous Services

Mr. Speaker, I will be sharing my time with the member for Saint-Laurent.

Today I speak in support of Bill C-3, an act to amend the Judges Act and the Criminal Code.

This bill has had the support of the House on two previous occasions, but despite all-party support has not yet become law. Listening to debate last Friday, it was obvious the bill continues to serve as an example of ongoing parliamentary collaboration and one which we should all take pride.

I want to start by recognizing and thanking the Hon. Rona Ambrose for her initiative on this critical issue. Her bill was the first legislation to be studied at the Standing Committee on the Status of Women. The collaborative work we did at committee made the bill stronger, and I am happy to see that the government has incorporated amendments from that study into this bill.

At the time Ms. Ambrose introduced her private member’s bill, several high-profile rulings had shown Canadians some judges did not understand sexual assault law and were relying on myths and stereotypes when issuing their rulings.

Members of the House will recall when former Alberta Federal Court Justice Robin Camp asked a sexual assault complainant why she could not “keep [her] knees together” during her alleged rape. Because of his comments, the Canadian Judicial Council launched a review into Justice Camp’s conduct and concluded that he “acted in a manner that seriously undermined public confidence in the judiciary.” Following the review, Justice Camp resigned.

Ultimately, Bill C-3 is about assuring Canadians that judges who are elevated to federally appointed positions have a desire to understand the myths and stereotypes that have been present in Canadian society for far too long. The federal government should appoint judges who acknowledge that learning is a lifelong process and value continuing education. This is a bill created to ensure that no other sexual assault complainant will be subject to condescending, humiliating and disrespectful conduct from a federally appointed judge.

Bill C-3 would amend the Judges Act to require that a candidate seeking appointment to a federally appointed judicial position attest to participating in training related to sexual assault law and its social context. The bill would also require the Canadian Judicial Council to ensure this training is developed after consultation with those knowledgeable in the field or other individuals or groups it considers appropriate, including sexual assault survivor organizations.

These amendments are designed to ensure that newly appointed superior court judges are fully apprised of the law in relation to sexual assault and on social context. Moreover, the bill is possible because of the already outstanding work the National Judicial Institute, the body responsible for creating judicial education in our country, has done, with help through federal investment, in developing comprehensive continuing education for judges on sexual assault law and its social context.

Finally, the bill would amend the Criminal Code to require that judges provide written reasons or enter them into the record of the proceeding for decisions in sexual assault proceedings.

I have talked about the social context of sexual assault, and I would like to provide a clearer definition of social context.

Quite simply, social context means the immediate social or physical environment in which one lives affects how one sees the world. The experience of an affluent woman who has survived sexual violence will be different than the experience of a woman who is homeless. The experience of a white trans-woman will be different than the experience of a cisgender indigenous woman. The experience of a gay man from Toronto will be different than the experience of a straight woman living with a disability in Amherst, Nova Scotia. The experience of a judge trained in myths and stereotypes about sexual assault will be different than a judge who has never received such training.

Importantly, in the context of the debate on the bill, social context affects how different people view the criminal justice system and how the criminal justice system views them. This is why it is my hope that at committee the bill can be expanded to clearly articulate the need for training, not just on sexual assault law and social context but on the need for training on anti-racism.

This summer, our country came to understand that systemic racism existed in all our institutions. In 2017, at the beginning of the #MeToo Movement, our country came to understand that systemic sexism existed within all our institutions as well.

Jennifer Koshan, professor of law at the University of Calgary, made clear in her testimony at the Standing Committee on the Status of Women that “not only does the law change, but social context can change”. This is why requiring that a candidate seeking appointment to a federally appointed judicial position attest to participating in training related to sexual assault law and its social context is so important.

Bill C-3 addresses a long-standing problem: the influence of myths and stereotypes in sexual assault law. As hard as it is today to imagine, prior to the reforms that began in 1983, a husband could not be convicted of sexually assaulting his wife. Sexual assault convictions required testimony from someone other than the victim. Victims had to raise a hue and cry before the assault and report it shortly afterward or they would not be believed. Victims' sexual reputation and prior sexual activity could be used to attack their credibility.

Reforms were enacted to address these and other evidentiary rules through the 1980s and 1990s. For instance, in response to concerns from survivors and women's organizations, amendments commonly referred to as the ”rape shield” provisions, which govern the admissibility of the complainant's prior sexual activity, were first introduced in 1983 and then amended in 1992. These provisions are designed to protect survivors from the introduction of evidence of their sexual history, which had been used to infer that they were more likely to have consented to the sexual activity in question or were less worthy of belief. The provisions also place restrictions on the use of sexual history evidence for other purposes unless specific criteria are met.

Also in 1992, a clear definition of “consent” in the context of sexual activity was introduced in the Criminal Code and limitations on the accused’s ability to raise a defence of mistaken belief in consent were enacted. The Supreme Court of Canada has provided guidance on the application of the sexual assault provisions, making it clear that consent must be affirmatively expressed through words or conduct and cannot be implied by submission, passivity or a failure to protest.

However, despite the robust legislation in place and the clear rulings from the highest court, myths and stereotypes about sexual assault survivors still creep into the courtroom and into judicial decisions. Identifying solutions to these ongoing challenges has been a priority for our government and, indeed, a matter of ongoing concern in Canada.

Our government introduced Bill C-51 in 2018. With its passage, the changes clarified a number of principles that were already covered in the law, notably, that an unconscious person cannot consent to sexual activity; an accused cannot rely on a mistaken belief in consent where that belief is based on a mistake in law, such as consent obtained through force; sexual history evidence must never be used to infer consent; and, finally, the admissibility of evidence of a victim’s private communications made for a sexual purpose must be determined through the rape shield provisions.

In addition, Bill C-51 provided that victims could make submissions and be represented by counsel in sexual history evidence or rape shield proceedings and that the admissibility of victims’ private records that were in the hands of the accused be determined through a process similar to that of the rape shield and third party records proceedings.

Our government has also modernized the judicial appointment process to bring greater diversity to the bench. During testimony in 2017 at the status of women committee, Professor Carissima Mathen said, “That's been a somewhat unheralded earthquake in the world of judicial appointments.... The innovations that have been done around judicial appointments...have been quite remarkable.”

Canada’s—

Judges ActGovernment Orders

3:30 p.m.

NDP

The Assistant Deputy Speaker NDP Carol Hughes

Unfortunately, the hon. member's time is up, but I am sure she will be able to add more during questions and comments.

Questions and comments, the hon. member for Sarnia—Lambton.

Judges ActGovernment Orders

3:30 p.m.

Conservative

Marilyn Gladu Conservative Sarnia—Lambton, ON

Madam Speaker, I very much enjoyed serving with the hon. member when we were on the status of women committee reviewing this bill and other issues, like violence against women and girls in Canada.

It is troubling how long it takes to make progress on this issue. I would ask the member to explain what is taking so long in completing measures to eliminate violence against women and girls.

Judges ActGovernment Orders

3:30 p.m.

Liberal

Pam Damoff Liberal Oakville North—Burlington, ON

Madam Speaker, I agree with the hon. member: It was a pleasure for us to work together at the status of women committee.

Sadly, this bill was held up in the Senate the first time around by a group of Conservative senators who did not want it passed. Despite the best efforts of the Hon. Rona Ambrose to try to change their minds, they refused to let the bill pass.

There is always more work to be done, and I look forward to working with the hon. member to ensure that we really do make strides when it comes to survivors of sexual assault and those who have survived gender-based violence.

Judges ActGovernment Orders

3:35 p.m.

Bloc

Marie-Hélène Gaudreau Bloc Laurentides—Labelle, QC

Madam Speaker, I would like my colleague to comment on the importance of passing this bill quickly, even if it is not the perfect solution, because we need to move forward.

Can we pass it quickly, since we agree on it?

Judges ActGovernment Orders

3:35 p.m.

Liberal

Pam Damoff Liberal Oakville North—Burlington, ON

Madam Speaker, I completely agree with the hon. member. Both times this bill has come to the House all parties have agree to move it quickly. It did get to the justice committee in the last session.

It is beyond time to get this bill passed. While we have more to do, I think it is very important that we work quickly on it.

Judges ActGovernment Orders

3:35 p.m.

NDP

Matthew Green NDP Hamilton Centre, ON

Madam Speaker, I would like to first acknowledge the work of the former leader of the official opposition, Rona Ambrose, for bringing forward this most important bill. I would also like to thank the hon. member for Oakville North—Burlington for her incredible introduction to the important social context regarding systemic racism and systemic sexism as they relate to the judiciary.

I want to refer to the comments by the hon. member for Cowichan—Malahat—Langford, our deputy justice critic. He brought to my attention one of the shortfalls of this bill: understanding the only remedy within our legislative authority while respecting the separation of the legislature and the judiciary.

What are the member's comments on the fact that the vast majority of appointed judges are provincial? Have there been any discussions of ways we can encourage existing sitting judges to participate in this most important initiative?

Judges ActGovernment Orders

3:35 p.m.

Liberal

Pam Damoff Liberal Oakville North—Burlington, ON

Madam Speaker, the hon. member is absolutely correct. This is something we heard about when we studied the bill at the status of women committee. The majority of sexual assault cases are heard in provincial courts.

Having said that, I think that educating federally appointed judges goes a long way in setting an example for the provincial courts. In terms of amending our legislation, it falls well outside the purview of the federal government to require that education.

I believe the second part of the member's question was about judges who are currently sitting. I know that Justice Kent is very committed to ensuring that the education being put forward for both new judges and sitting judges is robust, recognizing that there needs to be a separation between ourselves and the judiciary.