Debates of Dec. 9th, 2020

(Return tabled)

Question No.197

[Laurel Collins, NDP, Victoria, BC]

With regard to all federal funding committed to the creation and maintenance of housing stock in Nunavut, for each fiscal year from 2011-12 to 2020-21: (a) what was the total amount committed; (b) what was the total amount spent or best approximation; (c) how much new housing stock was created in Nunavut; and (d) what advocates, consultant lobbyists or business representatives, individuals or other organizations consulted with the relevant ministers regarding housing investments in Nunavut?

(Return tabled)

Question No.198

[Laurel Collins, NDP, Victoria, BC]

With regard to the direct delivery of mental health services and benefits for communities within Nunavut, including community-based mental health services for Inuit communities, non-insured drugs and short-term mental health crisis counselling for recognized Inuit people through the Non-Insured Health Benefits Program, addiction prevention, treatment and aftercare programs, mental health, emotional and cultural support services and transportation services to eligible former Indian residential school students, basic social services for Inuit communities, including income supports, home care services, and family violence prevention programs and services and the National Inuit Suicide Prevention Strategy, for the fiscal years from 2010-11 to 2020-21: (a) how much money was committed to these programs for each fiscal year, broken down by program; (b) what was the total spent and, if the final cost is not available, what is the best estimate of the cost for each fiscal year, broken down by program; (c) for each fiscal year of the programs, who was consulted, if anyone was consulted, to set subsidy levels or otherwise contribute to the programs development; and (d) for each year of the programs, what data and targets were being used to determine program funding?

(Return tabled)

Question No.199

[Laurel Collins, NDP, Victoria, BC]

With regard to RCMP operations in Nunavut, broken down by fiscal year from 2010-11 to 2020-21: (a) how much was spent on RCMP operations in the territory; (b) how much was spent on Inuit cultural training for RCMP officers who operated in the territory; (c) how many hours of cultural training were conducted; (d) how many officers were operating in Nunavut; (e) how much was spent on overtime for RCMP officers who were deployed to Nunavut; (f) how many complaints did the Civilian Review and Complaints Commission for the RCMP (CRCC) receive in Nunavut; (g) how many complaints were dismissed without being investigated; and (h) for requests for review in which the CRCC is not satisfied with the RCMP’s report, how many interim reports have been provided to complainants for response and input on recommended actions?

(Return tabled)

Question No.200

[Charlie Angus, NDP, Timmins—James Bay, ON]

With regard to the government’s capital expenditures on drinking water and wastewater infrastructure on reserve, and Indigenous Services Canada and its predecessors' expenditures on maintenance and operations for drinking water and wastewater infrastructure on reserve: (a) what amount has been allocated, broken down by program and by year (and, where applicable, by region), over the last five years; (b) what amount has been spent, broken down by program and by year (and, where applicable, by region), over the last five years; (c) over the past five years, how many boil water advisories have been active month to month; (d) over the past five years, which reserves have had water and wastewater infrastructure upgraded or built and what were they; (e) what are the companies that have received contracts to do the water and wastewater work on reserves; (f) where there any issues or problems in terms of fulfilling the contract and, if so, what were they; (g) out of the reserves that have had water and wastewater infrastructure built or repaired in the past five years, how many of them have had water issues, either with infrastructure or other issues, that resulted in renewed boil water advisories; (h) if so, which reserves, when did it occur and how long have they lasted; and (i) how long, according to the budgetary expectations, will it take to complete the government's promise to eliminate boil water advisories on First Nations reserves, based on the current level of funding?

(Return tabled)

Question No.201

[Jack Harris, NDP, St. John's East, NL]

With regard to the demographics of the staff of the Correctional Service of Canada: what percentage of correctional officers self-identify as (i) Indigenous, (ii) Black, (iii) another visible minority, broken down by region (Atlantic, Quebec, Ontario, Prairies, and Pacific)?

(Return tabled)

Question No.203

[Jack Harris, NDP, St. John's East, NL]

With regard to the demographics of the RCMP: (a) what percentage of RCMP members self-identify as (i) Indigenous, (ii) Black, (iii) from another visible minority; (b) what percentage of RCMP staff self-identify as (i) Indigenous, (ii) Black, (iii) from another visible minority; (c) what percentage of RCMP members identify as (i) female, (ii) male, (iii) other; and (d) what percentage of RCMP staff identify as (i) female, (ii) male, (iii) other?

(Return tabled)

Question No.204

[Charlie Angus, NDP, Timmins—James Bay, ON]

With regard to surveillance technologies and their procurement, study, and use by federal government institutions: (a) what direct contacts (i.e. phone calls, emails, or in-person meetings) have taken place between ministers and public servants at the deputy minister, assistant deputy minister, chief of staff or senior policy advisor level or equivalent, and Palantir, Clearview AI and any of their respective subsidiaries, and for each such instance, what was the date, the method of contact, the subject matter discussed and the job title of any public servants present for it; (b) has the government concluded any contracts, contribution agreements or other formal or informal agreements with Palantir, Clearview AI and any of their respective subsidiaries, and, if so (i) with which institution, (ii) for what purpose, product or intended outcome, (iii) beginning when, (iv) what is the value of the contract, contribution agreement or other agreement; (c) do any government institutions (including departments and branches of agencies and Crown corporations) use data analytic services or software in modeling or predicting human behaviour, such as predictive policing, and, if so, (i) with which institution, (ii) for what purpose, product or intended outcome, (iii) beginning when, (iv) what is the value of the contract, contribution agreement or other agreement; (d) what government institutions (including departments and branches of agencies and Crown corporations) are currently or are planning to start using facial recognition technology and (i) how long have they been using it, (ii) what are they using it for, (iii) how often do they use it, (iv) what suppliers (companies) are they using, (v) what is the value of any related contracts or agreements; and (e) have there been any privacy breaches related to this technology or uses that have been deemed improper?

(Return tabled)

Question No.205

[Jack Harris, NDP, St. John's East, NL]

With regard to the use of force by RCMP members in the course of their duty: (a) how many interactions between members of the RCMP and members of the public occurred in each of the years from 2000 to 2020, inclusively, that resulted in the (i) death, (ii) bodily injury, of a person, whether such death occurred immediately or subsequent to the incident or while in police custody; and (b) for each incident, what was the date, (i) whether the incident resulted in the injury, however minor, or death of the detained person, (ii) the province where the incident took place, (iii) the RCMP division involved, (iv) the community within the province where the incident occurred, or if the community is not possible, the RCMP detachment responsible for the geographic region where the incident occurred, (v) whether the incident took place in public, in a private home or other building, an RCMP vehicle, in an RCMP detachment building, or in an RCMP cell, (vi) whether the RCMP was acting in a contract policing role, (vii) the race, gender, sex, age of the person injured or deceased, (viii) whether medical attention was sought, (ix) if an investigation was launched, (x) if an investigation was launched, the name of the investigating agency, (xi) the outcome of any of the investigations, including the date thereof, and whether any charges were recommended or laid?

(Return tabled)

Questions Passed as Orders for Returns

[The Deputy Speaker, Conservative, Bruce Stanton]

Is it the pleasure of the House that the aforementioned questions be made orders for return and that they be tabled immediately?

[Some hon. members]

Agreed.

[Kevin Lamoureux, Liberal, Winnipeg North, MB]

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

[The Deputy Speaker, Conservative, Bruce Stanton]

Is that agreed?

[Some hon. members]

Agreed.

COVID-19 and Long-Term Care Facilities

[The Deputy Speaker, Conservative, Bruce Stanton]

The House has received a request for an emergency debate.

We will now go to the hon member for Vancouver Kingsway.

[Don Davies, NDP, Vancouver Kingsway, BC]

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to propose an emergency debate on the second wave of the COVID-19 pandemic and long-term care facilities.

I am deeply saddened to report that long-term care homes across Canada are once again being ravaged by COVID-19, despite the promises made by the government in response to the carnage of the first wave. Indeed, Canada utterly failed to protect vulnerable long-term care residents and workers during the initial outbreak of COVID-19. More than 840 outbreaks were reported in long-term care facilities and retirement homes across Canada, accounting for more than 80% of all COVID-19 deaths in this country, as of May 2020. This represents the worst record among all comparable nations.

The situation was so dire that the Canadian Armed Forces had to be called in. Residents were found underfed, abandoned and afraid. In some cases they were left to die alone in bed, covered in their own waste. These stories shocked our conscience and challenged our self-image as a compassionate and humane society. However, they were entirely foreseeable.

Experts and advocates had been raising the same concerns for many years, but successive governments failed to act. In fact, decades of research have demonstrated that insufficient staff-to-resident ratios and a reliance on part-time casual staff have led to hurried, dehumanizing care, high staff turnover and workforce instability in the long-term care sector all across Canada.

In its fall throne speech, the federal government pledged to, “Work with the provinces and territories to set new, national standards for long-term care so that seniors get the best [care] possible”. However, no meaningful action has been taken by the current federal government to date. As a result, Canadians living in long-term care are once again bearing the brunt of the COVID-19 pandemic.

Ryerson University's National Institute on Aging estimates that there have now been 1,976 long-term care facilities and retirement homes affected by COVID-19 outbreaks. This has resulted in the deaths of 9,355 residents and 16 staff, accounting for 74% of all COVID-19 deaths in Canada to date. Outbreaks continue to surge in long-term care facilities across Canada.

As of Friday, a total of 90 residents at Extendicare Parkside in Regina had tested positive for COVID-19, alongside 34 staff members. Toronto's Westside Long Term Care Home confirmed an outbreak at the facility on November 12, and since that time a total of 117 infections have been confirmed among residents, and 57 cases have been reported among staff. This is an urgent situation, demanding immediate action.

This pandemic has exposed a fragmented and under-resourced long-term care system across Canada that is heavily reliant on for-profit delivery. According to a recent analysis by the Toronto Star, residents of Ontario's for-profit long-term care homes are still experiencing significantly worse outcomes in the second wave of COVID-19, both in terms of infections and deaths, than those living in municipal or non-profit facilities. Residents in for-profit homes have been more than three times as likely to catch COVID-19 as those in a non-profit facility. For-profits have seen more than twice as many staff infections per bed, and resident deaths have been significantly more common.

Indeed, today we learned that two of the largest long-term care providers in the Toronto region, Extendicare and Sienna Senior Living, received more than $157 million in federal and provincial COVID-19 relief, while at the same time paying out $74 million in dividends to shareholders this year. Meanwhile, more than 480 residents and staff have died at those companies' facilities from COVID-19.

Federal leadership is urgently needed to implement a coordinated approach to protect vulnerable Canadians living in long-term care homes, both throughout the COVID-19 pandemic and in the years to come. Families are incredibly worried about their loved ones. They need concrete action now.

With the House adjourning soon, with the second wave of the pandemic raging and showing no signs of abating, and with provinces and territories increasing the measures they are demanding from their citizens because they see the COVID-19 pandemic increasing, it is essential that MPs have the opportunity to debate this crucial issue as soon as possible.

It is almost mid-December. We are going to be breaking until the end of January. We are in the middle of the second wave of the COVID-19 outbreak, and it is worse than the first. We know that deaths have occurred and are likely to occur in very high percentages in our long-term care homes. While the government promised action in the throne speech, we have seen no action. There is not a single national standard yet that has been—

Speaker's Ruling

[The Deputy Speaker, Conservative, Bruce Stanton]

I thank the hon. member for Vancouver Kingsway for bringing this to the attention of the House and for his intervention in this regard.

However, I am not satisfied that it meets the requirements of the Standing Orders at this time. We will not proceed any further.