House of Commons Hansard #34 of the 43rd Parliament, 2nd Session. (The original version is on Parliament's site.) The word of the day was peoples.

Topics

Citizenship ActGovernment Orders

6:25 p.m.

NDP

Heather McPherson NDP Edmonton Strathcona, AB

Madam Speaker, as the member knows, I agree with him on many of the things he brought up. One of the things he spoke about that I am quite interested in is his discussion on economic justice. In my province of Alberta, there was a bill brought forward, Bill 1 from the provincial government, and at the time the Alberta justice minister, Doug Schweitzer, said that Albertans would not be held economic hostage to law-breaking extremists.

Many people have called this particular bill very racist because it very much targets indigenous people and interferes with their ability to ensure their own economic justice. I just wonder what the member would say about that and how there are important ways we need to support indigenous rights to economic justice, and I just wonder how that works in Alberta as well.

Citizenship ActGovernment Orders

6:25 p.m.

Conservative

Warren Steinley Conservative Regina—Lewvan, SK

Madam Speaker, on protests in public areas, people should be able to protest, gather and make their opinions known to people they do not agree with as long as it is safe and they are not breaking the law.

I look forward to having the conversation around the member for Foothills' private member's bill about not allowing protests on private property and whether we think people should be able to go on farms and protest, which I am not in favour of. That bill is coming up very soon and we can have a good conversation around that, but people have the right to protest safely on public property.

Citizenship ActGovernment Orders

6:30 p.m.

Conservative

Kenny Chiu Conservative Steveston—Richmond East, BC

Madam Speaker, I am here today to debate Bill C-8, an act designed to implement a change in the oath of citizenship, in response to recommendation 94 of the Truth and Reconciliation Commission, a simple amendment to the Citizenship Act to pay lip service to respecting the treaty rights of first nations, Inuit and Métis people.

I find that there is little logic to support this bill when it is so glaringly exclusionary of many Métis, Inuit and B.C. first nations that are not under treaty rights. They have no effective treaties in their respective area.

What purpose does the bill serve beyond virtue signalling to hashtag-loving armchair activists on social media? It is more than mere symbolism to say that our nation is a nation of immigrants that stands on traditional territories of, and shoulder to shoulder with, our first nations, Inuit and Métis peoples. Canada is one of the few countries in the world where indigenous rights and treaty rights are entrenched and enshrined in our Constitution. I do believe that educating Canadians about these rights is an important part of the path to reconciliation.

Education is about more than platitudes. I am proud to say that in Canada this education is already taking place. New citizens, having completed their residency requirements, and having studied the handbook of history, responsibilities and obligations, are expected to be aware of the rights entrenched within the Constitution. This gives them at least a general view of the spectrum of resolved and unresolved treaty rights in different parts of our country. In learning about our nation's history, new Canadians develop respect for what is among Canada's existing body of laws. They learn to appreciate the need to fulfill the remaining unfulfilled treaty obligations within the process of reconciliation and aspire to see their new home improved for all.

Apparently, the Liberal government believes Canadians are so unsophisticated that they would think this task could be accomplished by merely changing the oath of citizenship. Such empty gestures shows that the leadership of our government is more interested in patronizing minorities and photo ops than substantive policy development.

Over 30 years ago, I came to Canada as an immigrant. Like a few members of this House, I have taken the oath of citizenship of our great nation. The oath is simple. Unlike the government's promises, it is not a word salad. It represents the final step of a journey from the initial entry to planting roots and eventually becoming a citizen. The oath of citizenship need not be and should not be complicated, nor a thorough examination of the rights and obligations of what it is to be Canadian. It is merely an affirmation of loyalty to the Queen of Canada, representing the head of state of our constitutional monarchy, and an affirmation to obey our laws and obligations as Canadians. These laws include the Constitution. The Constitution, in turn, recognizes and affirms the aboriginal and treaty rights of first nations, Inuit and Métis peoples. To accept the proposed legislation is, therefore, an unnecessary redundancy.

I ask again: What purpose does this bill serve?

As I have mentioned, along the way to becoming a citizen, a new immigrant must read materials relating to the origins of Canada, including Canadian indigenous people. I believe Canada's indigenous peoples would be better served by emphasizing recommendation number 93, rather than 94, of the Truth and Reconciliation Commission's calls to action, by strengthening this education. This recommendation calls upon the federal government, in collaboration with national aboriginal organizations to revise the information kit for newcomers to Canada and its citizenship tests to reflect a more inclusive history of the diverse aboriginal peoples of Canada, including information about the treaties and histories of residential schools. My alternative to Bill C-8 is just this: implementing recommendation 93 would go further to educating new Canadians about history with our first nations and the obligations the Crown has to them.

Such content can also discuss part II of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms. Section 35 states, “The existing aboriginal and treaty rights of the aboriginal peoples of Canada are hereby recognized and affirmed.” Despite many months and many new ideas being presented, the government continues to retable the bill verbatim. I and many other Canadians continue to have the same reaction now as we did each time the bill was brought forward. It is yet another insubstantial virtue signal by the Liberal government.

Canadians are growing tired of this cliché. The government consistently fumbles through crisis after crisis, desperate to take attention away from its failings when it comes to Canada's indigenous peoples. While the Trudeau government takes pride in this as a form of reconciliation, Canadian indigenous people are still—

Citizenship ActGovernment Orders

6:35 p.m.

NDP

The Assistant Deputy Speaker NDP Carol Hughes

The hon. member is not allowed to mention anyone who sits in the House. He mentioned the Prime Minister by his last name and I would ask him to refrain from doing that in the remainder of his speech.

Citizenship ActGovernment Orders

6:35 p.m.

Conservative

Kenny Chiu Conservative Steveston—Richmond East, BC

Madam Speaker, it is yet another substantive virtue signal by the Liberal government. Canadians are growing tired of this cliché. The government consistently fumbles through crisis after crisis, desperate to take attention away from its failings when it comes to Canada. While the government takes pride in this as a form of reconciliation, Canadian indigenous people are still dealing with drinking water and boil water advisories. The government should be putting more time and energy into steps to ensure such advisories are not necessary in the future, that the safety of drinking water is sustainable and that access to basic priorities like clean water is no longer a concern.

For a government to place such emphasis on reconciliation as a core priority, it must be willing to do what is necessary to provide equality of opportunity for all Canadian communities. Like every Canadian hurt throughout the pandemic, first nations people want to work and do what is best. They have had both opportunities denied under the Liberal government. Before the pandemic, Canada's first nations showed that they wanted to work and contribute to Canada. They sought opportunities by supporting the jobs and benefits to the economy that pipeline construction creates.

As the year has progressed, on the opposite side of the country we have seen first nations continue to seek economic advantage by fighting for their moderate livelihood fisheries. In 2020, jobs have been lost and the deficit is skyrocketing. Canada cannot afford more indecision and meaningless gestures. Canadians need to see meaningful actions taken. Canada has a long and complicated relationship with its indigenous peoples, and I readily agree that further steps are required to strengthen our relationship.

Changing the oath of citizenship does not accomplish this great task. Work done should add to strengthening relations within the Canadian social fabric. For failing to act on this, the government will be held to account by the people. Canadians deserve better than another empty promise of sunny ways made by politicians wishing to cater sympathetic favour to reduce proud citizens of this country to tokens cynically used to curry political favour.

As a Conservative member of Parliament, I stand for the improvement of Canada. My party stands for the improvement of this country. We represent many Canadians who want better than a government that consistently failed in its mandates by changing the rules and not providing urgent or transparent actions to address the concerns. No matter the gravity of the issue facing Canada or the concerns of indigenous inhabitants, the government has served the House unappealing word salads in its responses.

Similarly, the bill is but another response devoid of any substance. Perhaps Bill C-6 is something that should be delayed until such time as call to action 93 or more meaningful action, such as ending all boil water advisories and making real, meaningful progress on reconciliation, is accomplished.

Citizenship ActGovernment Orders

6:40 p.m.

Liberal

Mark Gerretsen Liberal Kingston and the Islands, ON

Madam Speaker, when the member for Battle River—Crowfoot chastised me for being overly partisan, I actually started to feel maybe I was a little tough on him there, and then I heard that speech.

The member said in his speech that a lot of members in the House probably have not given that oath. I actually have. I am not an immigrant. Both of my parents came to Canada in the fifties, and they would have given that oath, but I also gave that oath on a number of occasions when I was a mayor. Before Stephen Harper got rid of all those great citizenship ceremonies in so many parts of the country, as a mayor I had the opportunity every few months to get up and recite the oath with those new citizens. It was quite an experience to see them experiencing that and being a part of that.

Would the member agree that adjusting that to properly reflect what Canada is, is incredibly important for newcomers to this country?

Citizenship ActGovernment Orders

6:40 p.m.

NDP

The Assistant Deputy Speaker NDP Carol Hughes

I want to remind members: there is a lot of back and forth, and I am sure that the member for Steveston—Richmond East is able to answer that question without any help.

The hon. member.

Citizenship ActGovernment Orders

6:40 p.m.

Conservative

Kenny Chiu Conservative Steveston—Richmond East, BC

Madam Speaker, such is the burden to govern. I imagine the member would also understand that changing the oath is not something that will substantially benefit our first nations people. What I am saying is that if the government is actually genuine about reconciliation and helping improve the lives of our first nations, Inuit and Métis peoples, it should actually consider what I recommend. It should either help restore the clean water provision or implement recommendation 93 instead.

Citizenship ActGovernment Orders

6:40 p.m.

Bloc

Mario Simard Bloc Jonquière, QC

Madam Speaker, I would like to come back to what my Liberal colleague just said about an oath that properly reflects what Canada is.

This reminds me that I have often heard the Prime Minister say that Canada was the first post-national country in the world. That means there is no nation in Canada. There is no Quebec nation and no indigenous nations. It is a post-national country.

This brings up two possibilities. Either the Prime Minister is not consistent, or he realizes that there are nations in Canada, including indigenous nations.

I will therefore ask my colleague this question: Does he recognize that Canada is not a post-national country and that there are nations, including the Quebec nation and the indigenous nations?

Citizenship ActGovernment Orders

6:40 p.m.

Conservative

Kenny Chiu Conservative Steveston—Richmond East, BC

Madam Speaker, in its early days the Harper Conservative government actually did recognize Quebec as a nation within a united Canada. That was a very bold step that would actually lead to the united Canada that we are enjoying so much today. What I am trying to say is that when we are facing reconciliation with our first nations peoples in Canada, there are many better things we could do, and more substantive actions we could take, than changing the oath of citizenship, as the Liberal government has proposed.

Citizenship ActGovernment Orders

6:40 p.m.

NDP

Taylor Bachrach NDP Skeena—Bulkley Valley, BC

Madam Speaker, I listened with interest to my hon. colleague's remarks. I think I may have heard him describe the amendments before us as a word salad, and the assertion that these are changes brought forward by the government, I believe, is misplaced. These are changes that were recommended to us by the Truth and Reconciliation Commission, so I am wondering if the hon. member has read through the other 93 calls to action from the TRC and whether there are other calls to action he would describe as a word salad.

Would he like to share those words with the commission itself?

Citizenship ActGovernment Orders

6:45 p.m.

Conservative

Kenny Chiu Conservative Steveston—Richmond East, BC

Madam Speaker, my speech was addressing a long frustration that I have accumulated and what I have observed in the one year that I have had here in the House. There is a lot of promise here. There are a lot of sunny way promises, except it is still snowing and it is still cloudy out there. I am not directly referring to the current proposal of the oath of citizenship that we are looking at here.

Again, a mere changing of words would not help improve our aboriginal peoples' lives.

Citizenship ActGovernment Orders

6:45 p.m.

Conservative

David Sweet Conservative Flamborough—Glanbrook, ON

Madam Speaker, it is always an honour to rise in this chamber, and for this debate, it is a very big honour for me.

Members have alluded to their experiences with citizenship ceremonies. They are, of course, overwhelmingly emotional. They are, of course, overwhelmingly filled with gratitude by those who are getting their citizenship, as well as those who were born on these shores when we realize the great lottery we won by being born here, the best country in the world.

I have a number of memories, but I will just mention two of them. There is the citizenship ceremony in which my father-in-law, after many years of being a German citizen, received Canadian citizenship, and subsequently my own wife, who received Canadian citizenship. Those were big days.

I also want to recognize a phenomenal citizenship judge who happened to have been the mayor of Hamilton for eight years and then became a citizenship judge for six years. I want to recognize the late Robert Morrow, because he was one of the citizenship judges that I knew who could encapsulate the history of Canada, going from first nations, indigenous and Métis peoples all the way through to modern day. He could capture the entire room for 20 minutes while bringing that whole history to life, and what a beautiful history it is. I thank Bob Morrow very much for his contribution to citizenship.

I would also note what one of my colleagues alluded to earlier, the campaign to make sure that Sergeant Tommy Prince would be pictured on the five-dollar bill. Tommy Prince was the recipient of 11 medals, including battle honours. He served in the Princess Patricia's Canadian Light Infantry. I will read from a CBC article, which quoted my colleague for Calgary Shepard, who said:

He's a founding member of Canada's elite first Canadian parachute battalion, and the Devil's Brigade during the Second World War.... He was one of the soldiers who defended hill 677 in the battle of Kapyong during the Korean War. He won 11 medals. That makes him the most decorated Indigenous war veteran, combat veteran, in the history of Canada.

I would encourage my colleagues, because we have talked a lot about not only a message in principle but doing the right thing, to support that initiative.

I will read the oath and note the wording that will be changed. It begins, “I swear (or affirm) that I will be faithful and bear true allegiance to Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth the Second, Queen of Canada, Her Heirs and Successors, and that I will faithfully observe the laws of Canada,” and then continues with the addition from Bill C-8, which reads, “including the Constitution, which recognizes and affirms the Aboriginal and treaty rights of First Nations, Inuit and Métis peoples, and fulfil my duties as a Canadian citizen.”

One way we can illuminate this is to get to know our first nations brothers and sisters. My best education about indigenous peoples came from all of the indigenous individuals I have known. I had a dark time in my life, which is public knowledge and I do not mind mentioning it. I was institutionalized when I was young, and there were two dozen first nations individuals I knew who were there from all across the country. They generally were there because they were very poor. In those days, one could be incarcerated as a youth if one was incorrigible, so many of them were incarcerated in what they called “training schools” in those days, which I have spoken about before in the House. They were really prison institutions for boys eight to 16 years old, and there were several institutions for girls in that respect as well. I do not want to dwell on that as much as to say that I got to know first nations boys at that time, and I had never met a first nations individual before.

I grew up in Kingston, Ontario, and the member for Kingston and the Islands may be happy about that or he might not, but I grew up on Alfred Street, Earl Street and Frontenac Street. My brothers went to KCVI, LCVI and QECVI. I went to the old Victoria School, which has now been repurposed for Queen's University. However, I had never met anyone from a reserve or an indigenous person who lived off reserve. It was not until I was there at that institution that I began my education about what it meant to be a first nations citizen.

To my great fortune, I met many more. I was on the board of a charity with an individual named Ross Maracle, a Mohawk leader from Tyendinaga. Ross will be happy that I still remember his Mohawk name, Rowedahowe. Another person I met was a Cree leader from Manitoba, Larry Wilson, who I just found out recently is now a chaplain in prisons helping individuals get back on their feet and into a better way of life. I remember meeting Chief David General too, at a very tough time, in Caledonia. I remember touring first nations with Chief Anita Hill.

All of these relationships were profoundly educational for me and made me understand the history. They also made me understand people's desire to be appreciated as individuals and not to be labelled as groups. So often when we try to solve problems, that is what we do.

I am happy for this addition to the oath, as long as we bring it to life.

One of my friends, and I hope he is okay with me calling him a friend, is named Nathan Tidridge. He recently won a Governor General's award for teaching history. He is one of the most significant Canadian citizens I know building bridges for reconciliation with first nations.

I got to know him most intimately after he raised money for a monument. In the riding I represent, there is a town called Waterdown. It is growing in leaps and bounds. That means there is lots of development, but traditional lands of first nations are being gobbled up in it. He wanted to make sure there was a marker there for the Souharissen people.

He raised the money for the monument, and got permission from the city to lay the monument. The Lieutenant Governor of Ontario was there, along with me and some others, to make sure there was not only a ceremony but a solemn oath in the community that the Souharissen natural area be remembered. It is the traditional territory for Neutral, Haudenosaunee and Mississaugas of the Credit First Nations peoples.

The more I got to know Nathan Tidridge, the more I admired him. I will quote something he wrote in regard to our stewardship of the promises we have made to our indigenous brothers and sisters:

An Indigenous teaching is that for non-Indigenous People, ceremony often bookends the real work of governments, whereas for Indigenous People, it is interwoven into the entire process. In Canada, the Queen and her representatives sit at the apex of our state and are therefore the keepers of our highest protocols and national ceremony.

The unique relationships between the Queen’s representatives and First Nations provide vehicles for convening community—bringing together diverse stakeholders in a non-partisan way to focus on a particular issue—and fostering communication that are not available to politicians tied to a system dominated by a four-year election cycle.

Invitations from the governor general, an office bound to Indigenous People through Treaty and infused with centuries of history, are more readily accepted than those from a politician or government. This unique power allows members from different communities and perspectives to gather in the apolitical space that is required to reflect the values inherent in Treaty.

The power to convene community in no way interferes with the convention of responsible government. However, it can build on the Crown’s traditional rights to be consulted, to encourage, and to warn, first articulated by the 19th-century British constitutional expert Walter Bagehot. The Crown’s unique ability to convene community above the political fray is even more important in these polarized and volatile times.

It is my hope that not only will this be part of the new oath but the current government and future governments will consider empowering the office of the Governor General, the Queen's representative here, to really deal with the relationship aspect between us and first nations to bring about real change and real reconciliation.

Citizenship ActGovernment Orders

6:55 p.m.

Liberal

Mark Gerretsen Liberal Kingston and the Islands, ON

Madam Speaker, I have a comment more than a question. It is always nice to hear stories from people who once lived in Kingston. The member's elementary school closed, and I regret to inform him that his high school is closing also. This is the last year KCVI will be open.

I was really taken by something the member said at the very beginning of his speech. He said that those who live in Canada have won the lottery, and I could not agree with him more. We live in the best country in the world with an incredible quality of life. Despite the differences we have in this place, I really hope we can all reflect on that comment he made, because it genuinely is the truth of what Canada is and what we are.

Citizenship ActGovernment Orders

6:55 p.m.

Conservative

David Sweet Conservative Flamborough—Glanbrook, ON

Madam Speaker, I was hoping the member was going to call me a Kingstonian because only people from Kingston know that is the real name. I thank him for the kind comments.

This is a really passionate area for me. I think back to the spirit of 1967, our first centennial year, when we celebrated not only the nation but also our first nations people. If we remember that spirit and that time, I think we can have a renaissance and bring about some really powerful change with our first nations sisters and brothers.

Citizenship ActGovernment Orders

6:55 p.m.

Bloc

Maxime Blanchette-Joncas Bloc Rimouski-Neigette—Témiscouata—Les Basques, QC

Madam Speaker, the Bloc Québécois supports the principle of Bill C-8, and we certainly support a nation-to-nation dialogue with the first nations.

However, we believe the citizenship oath made to the Queen, to the monarchy, must be changed. It is repugnant to Quebeckers. It is a legacy of British colonialism of which Canada is still a part. It is a very questionable legacy right now. The numbers speak for themselves. According to a fairly recent Angus Reid poll conducted in January 2020, over 70% of Quebeckers do not want the country to continue as a constitutional monarchy.

Nearly 45% of Canadians want to withdraw from the constitutional monarchy. It costs over $50 million per year. I think that my Conservative colleagues would agree with me about saving money.

The former finance minister, who was thrown under the bus recently because of the WE Charity scandal, said that the only reason why he wanted to stay in the monarchy was to maintain a good relationship with the Commonwealth. There are 53 countries in the Commonwealth and 21 of them are monarchies, of which 16 fall under the authority of Elizabeth II and five have different monarchs. There are also 32 republics.

When will we stop being a monarchy so that we can finally be free of British neo-colonialism?

Citizenship ActGovernment Orders

6:55 p.m.

Conservative

David Sweet Conservative Flamborough—Glanbrook, ON

Madam Speaker, I disagree with my colleague.

If I have a minute, I will speak to something I wanted to get to. When indigenous nations first encountered Europeans on Turtle Island they began incorporating them into a long-established protocol of treaty making. Treaties created the necessary diplomatic space in which very different societies could communicate and negotiate complex relationships despite radically different world views.

The Crown was a natural vehicle for settlers to enter into long-term relationships with their indigenous partners. A treaty, like the institution of monarchy, is an organic creation that evolves or devolves depending on those who are engaged with it. It is meant to be the best reflection of the constituents. Treaties also requires personal relationships to be effective.

Citizenship ActGovernment Orders

7 p.m.

NDP

Heather McPherson NDP Edmonton Strathcona, AB

Madam Speaker, I would like to thank the member for his comments. I have had the great pleasure of working with him on the international human rights committee, and I greatly respect his work.

One thing I would like to get his comments on is this. Knowing how important true meaningful reconciliation is to him, as the current government brings forward UNDRIP, the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, will he be supporting that legislation?

Citizenship ActGovernment Orders

7 p.m.

Conservative

David Sweet Conservative Flamborough—Glanbrook, ON

Madam Speaker, I think the member may have been talking about UNDRIP. I am not entirely certain. The principles in UNDRIP are very good, but there are some aspects that are problematic. We are one of the few countries that has first nations rights in our Constitution. That is my position.

Citizenship ActGovernment Orders

7 p.m.

Conservative

Philip Lawrence Conservative Northumberland—Peterborough South, ON

Madam Speaker, it is always a privilege to speak to any matter in the House, particularly one as important as this.

Today, I am honoured to stand in the House of Commons on the unceded territory of the Algonquin Anishinabe to speak to Bill C-8, an act to amend the Citizenship Act, Truth and Reconciliation Commission of Canada's call to action number 94.

Despite the fact that Canada is one of the few countries where indigenous rights and treaties are entrenched in our Constitution, our relationship with indigenous people is far from perfect. In many cases, it represents a dark chapter in Canada's history, which has left a damaging impact on the lives of indigenous people across our country. It is truly sad and disgraceful.

The Indian Act, which was introduced in 1876, was a statute through which the government administered Indian status, local indigenous governments and the management of reserve lands and communal money. This is used to this day, but has been amended over the years, most significantly in 1951 and 1985, with changes mainly focusing on the removal of particularly discriminatory sections. In this legislation, the government still holds some control over the indigenous people of Canada and shows how much more we still have to do on the road to reconciliation.

One of the most notable parts of Canada's history with indigenous people was the creation and involvement in the residential school system. This terrible act committed by the government saw thousands of children ripped away from their families and forced to assimilate with what was perceived as Canadian values, which could not be further from the truth.

Between 1831 and 1996, 130 schools were opened and operated. Within their walls, were 150,000 indigenous children who had been removed from their families and forced to live in terrible conditions, while their rich culture and history was stripped from them. As a parent of a five year old and a seven year old, I can only imagine the heartbreak and tragedy of having children ripped from one's home, taken and told that everything they believed and held true was not true. That would be one of my worst nightmares. The fact this happened in Canada and happened to thousands of children is disgraceful.

The abuse endured by these poor children included sexual and physical assault, overcrowding, poor sanitation, lack of medical care and forced labour. We lost over 6,000 indigenous children. One of those children could have grown up and found a cure cancer or a cure for COVID. Instead, we unfortunately and sadly we lost them.

Those who survived were found to have suffered historic trauma, which has left a lasting adverse effect on indigenous cultures for generations to come. This history of abuse is a shameful portion of Canadian history and reminds us of the respect and dignity that should be afforded all people, including indigenous people.

In this modern day and age, indigenous people across Canada continue to face many serious issues. As a country, we have a lot of work ahead of us on the path to reconciliation, to true and meaningful reconciliation.

I have been shocked and disgusted by some recent news articles outlining the way our indigenous people are being treated to this day. Many indigenous communities across Canada still do no have access to clean drinking water. It is—

Citizenship ActGovernment Orders

7:05 p.m.

NDP

The Assistant Deputy Speaker NDP Carol Hughes

I was trying to get the member's attention. Unfortunately, the time is up, but the hon. member will have six minutes the next time this matter is before the House for his speech and then questions and comments.

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

COVID-19 Emergency ResponseAdjournment Proceedings

7:05 p.m.

Conservative

Cheryl Gallant Conservative Renfrew—Nipissing—Pembroke, ON

Madam Speaker, as the member of Parliament for Renfrew—Nipissing—Pembroke, I take this opportunity to thank the good people of my riding for their support and words of encouragement. It is an honour to represent them in the Parliament of Canada.

Earlier in this session, I asked a direct question for the Prime Minister about the disability tax credit promoters cottage industry that had prospered under his government. It collects exorbitant fees from disabled Canadians for a service that I provide free of charge to my constituents.

Seven years ago, I introduced a private member's bill, Bill C-462, restricting the fees charged by promoters of the disability tax credit. The Prime Minister at the time voted in favour of that legislation as did all the members of Parliament. My intention in sponsoring that legislation was straightforward. I wanted to see increased protection for disabled Canadians from the predatory practices of certain individuals who referred to themselves as tax credit promoters. When I found out that some individuals were being charged 20%, 30%, or 40% of the tax credit, I knew action had to be taken.

The last time I posed a question on this topic, the Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of National Revenue chose to insult disabled Canadians by not giving them a relevant response in answering my question. This time, the member for Delta, aptly renamed the minister for virtue signalling to the disabled, was tagged by the Prime Minister to insult disabled Canadians by giving a different non-answer to why the government had not implemented Bill C-462, an act restricting the fees charged by promoters of the disability tax credit. The legislation to protect disabled Canadians was voted on and passed unanimously by Parliament.

The following is an email I received from a constituent about one of the biggest disability tax credit promoters in Canada. It is one of many emails I have received from disabled Canadians who have been taken advantage of, thanks to the policy of the government to ignore them. It illustrates the situation the government condones every day it delays implementing Bill C-462, an act restricting the fees charged by promoters of the disability tax credit. The email states:

“I live in Arnprior with my wife, 75 years old and basically bedridden. I'm contacting you because I don't know where else I can go, and I remembered a few years ago you were investigating into this company and were going to introduce a bill to halt their practices. Anyhow, about 10 years ago, my wife unwittingly contacted them to secure outstanding disability payments from CRA. She thought she was contacting a government agency, and they did get her a little over $9,000, then sent her a bill for $3,500. We thought that was unreasonable so we consulted Legal Aid. They told us that it was definitely unreasonable and ignore them. So my wife never recognized the debt. That was 10 years ago.

Then in January of this year, we received a bill for $11,000 sent by a company called Veritas. I thought it was a scam because we didn't owe anyone $11,000. About a month ago, we received another bill for over $9,000 from a law firm, saying if we didn't pay them by November 14, they would file bankruptcy against my wife. They've since changed it to $6,800. My wife earns $1,800 a month from CPP, old age security and a small pension.

I'm sorry this is so long, but I'm hoping you can help us. Thank you.”

That charge is almost 40%, and I am told that this tax credit promoter drives a Maserati, which the Prime Minister knows is a very expensive Italian car.

The minister of virtue signalling to the disabled brags about doing things behind the scenes. How about working for disabled Canadians behind the scenes and getting the regulations to enact Bill C-462 done?

COVID-19 Emergency ResponseAdjournment Proceedings

7:10 p.m.

Mount Royal Québec

Liberal

Anthony Housefather LiberalParliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Labour

Madam Speaker, we all agree that advocacy for the disabled is really important, but I will be answering the member's question on the Order Paper about the right to disconnect in federally regulated workplaces.

Canada and the world continues to deal with the impacts of the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic.

As we continue to weather the storm together, I can confirm that employee health and safety is a priority for the Government of Canada and employers.

COVID-19 Emergency ResponseAdjournment Proceedings

7:10 p.m.

Conservative

Cheryl Gallant Conservative Renfrew—Nipissing—Pembroke, ON

A point of order, Madam Speaker.