Debates of April 24th, 2023

Human Rights

[Ziad Aboultaif, Conservative, Edmonton Manning, AB]

Madam Speaker, I have petition 11759654 signed by 28 members. The undersigned citizens and residents of Canada draw the attention of the House of Commons to the following. Whereas Canadians have the right to be protected against discrimination, it is a fundamental Canadian right to be politically active and vocal. It is in the best interests of Canadian democracy to protect public debate and the exchange of different ideas. Bill C-257 seeks to add protection against political discrimination to the Canadian Human Rights Act.

Therefore, the undersigned citizens and residents of Canada call upon the House of Commons to first, support Bill C-257, which bans discrimination on the basis of political belief or activity, and, two, defend the rights of Canadians to peacefully express their political opinions.

Ethiopia

[Damien Kurek, Conservative, Battle River—Crowfoot, AB]

Madam Speaker, as always, it is a true honour to rise in this place and bring to the attention of this House some incredibly important issues that Canadians have signed petitions about. Today, I have three petitions that I am pleased to table on behalf of many Canadians.

In the first petition, citizens draw attention to the House of Commons the following and ask the government to take these following actions: one, immediately call for an end to violence and for restraint from all sides and parties involved in the Tigray conflict in Ethiopia; two, immediately call—

[The Assistant Deputy Speaker, NDP, Carol Hughes]

I would remind the member that he is to summarize what is in the petition and not read everything in the petition.

The hon. member for Battle River—Crowfoot.

[Damien Kurek, Conservative, Battle River—Crowfoot, AB]

Madam Speaker, although I cannot show you, I think I am doing an admirable job of summarizing what is in a very lengthy petition. I thank you for that reminder and can assure you I am doing so as briefly as I can.

The petitioners also call for humanitarian access to the region and for independent monitoring to be allowed, and for international investigations into the credible reports of war crimes and gross violations of human rights law. They call for engaging directly and consistently with the Ethiopian and Eritrean governments on this conflict; and for promoting short-, medium- and long-term elections monitoring in Ethiopia.

Hazaras

[Damien Kurek, Conservative, Battle River—Crowfoot, AB]

Madam Speaker, the second petition that I have the honour of tabling here today is specifically that there are residents from Alberta who draw to the attention of the House a host of details surrounding violence against the Hazaras. With the fall of the Afghan government in August of 2021 and the Taliban taking over control of Afghanistan, the Harazas once again find themselves in a situation they faced at the end of the last millennium and the beginning of this millennium of massacre, arrest, forced mass displacement and confiscation of their land. The Taliban regime is perpetrating so many of these things.

Therefore, there are many Canadians calling upon the Government of Canada to recognize the ongoing genocide and persecution of the Hazaras and to prioritize refugees from this persecuted group of people within Afghanistan.

Justice

[Damien Kurek, Conservative, Battle River—Crowfoot, AB]

Madam Speaker, the third petition that I have the honour of tabling in this House today is on an issue that so many Canadians have followed closely, and that is that the Supreme Court of Canada in R. v. Bissonnette struck down section 745.51 of the Criminal Code, which allowed for parole ineligibility periods to be applied consecutively for mass murderers.

As a result of that, some of the most notorious and disgusting individuals are able to apply for parole after only 25 years in prison even though they have committed crimes for which these individuals should never see the light of day. The courts have actually said, by virtue of sentencing, that they should never see the light of day again.

Therefore, there is a host of individuals urging the Liberal Minister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada to invoke the notwithstanding clause and override this unfair and unjust decision that is truly an insult to so many victims of the worst mass murderers and criminals in Canadian history.

It is always an honour to table petitions by Canadians who are passionate about these issues in this place.

Transportation

[Kevin Lamoureux, Liberal, Winnipeg North, MB]

Madam Speaker, I am pleased to present a petition from many residents of Winnipeg North and Winnipeg who are of Indo-Canadian heritage, in particular.

The petitioners want to see international flights going between Winnipeg and India or, secondarily, Europe. This demand continues to grow. They are looking to the government and members of Parliament to do what they can in terms of lobbying for that additional international flight.

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

Seniors

[Rachel Blaney, NDP, North Island—Powell River, BC]

Madam Speaker, I appreciate this opportunity to talk about seniors.

Across my riding of North Island—Powell River, I am hearing from more and more seniors who are struggling to make ends meet. They are having a hard time affording food, affording their medication and being able to pay for the key things that make their life reasonable.

I am also hearing from more and more seniors in rental units who are being evicted and have nowhere else to go. It is very concerning to listen to the organizations that work so hard to keep people fed and housed in our region and understand how many seniors are falling through the cracks.

I was able to ask a question several weeks ago about the fact that OAS for seniors is being increased only for seniors 75 and older, which means that seniors aged 65 to 74 are really struggling. It was very interesting to me when a constituent got a hold of my office and talked about the fact that her neighbour, who is over 75, received a letter informing her that her old age security would be increased by about $200 a month, which was a huge relief to that senior. However, the senior who wrote to me is not near 75 yet; she has a few years until she gets there. She talked about how hard it was. She looked it up online, trying to figure out why she did not get the increase, and then she realized it was because of age. This did not reflect her needs.

My question to the government was simply this: Given the reality of inflation, why is the government telling seniors 65 to 74 that they do not require this, especially some of our most vulnerable seniors, who are struggling with poverty?

When I look at the budget, I am very happy to finally see dental care for seniors. I have heard from seniors across my riding, some of whom have waited outside the door with their information because they heard I was fighting for seniors to get dental care. It was absolutely sad to hear the stories of the extreme pain and then often having to wait years, saving money and trying to find a way to pay for root canals and the different procedures they needed. One senior said to me that they could afford a couple of hundred dollars it cost every year to get their teeth cleaned, but they could not afford anything else. Therefore, whenever they had a problem, such as a cavity, it could take them a few years to pay for it. Thus, I am really pleased that dental care is in the budget, but I am unhappy that we do not see anything else.

We know that we forced the government to do this. Two years ago, the Liberals voted against dental care for seniors in this country. We made them do it, and I am glad that it is here. Nevertheless, too many seniors are falling through the cracks, and we could do something about their suffering in this country if the government had the political will to do so.

I want to point out that single seniors are perhaps the most impacted group of seniors. Their cost of living is two-thirds the cost of a couple, and they have to make up that resource for themselves. We know that a lot of single seniors are renting; the cost of housing is significantly higher than it was, and it is only increasing.

Single Seniors for Tax Fairness has come up with some really important ideas that I was hoping to see in the budget. However, we did not see those things reflected in the budget, which I think is very unfortunate.

We need to make sure that the seniors of this country are getting the supports they need so that they can live according to a bar of dignity. Having the OAS increased for those seniors between 65 and 74 would bring up that bar of dignity. It is not the only solution, but it is a solution that this government could put in place fairly quickly if it had the political will.

I am back here again fighting hard for seniors because they deserve to have the financial support to live with dignity. Single seniors with a very fixed income deserve to feel that they can live with dignity, and too many across this country are making decisions between appropriate housing, clothing, bills, heat and medication. I think Canada should do so much more for seniors, and I wonder why the Liberal government does not agree.

[Mark Gerretsen, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the Leader of the Government in the House of Commons (Senate)]

Madam Speaker, the hon. member for North Island—Powell River raises the very important issue of dignity and I wholeheartedly agree with much of what she said. Seniors do deserve a dignified retirement after a lifetime of hard work. They deserve to live knowing that they have the means to pay for their housing, food and medications, to name a few. With food costs and rental costs soaring, it is hard for people to put their financial cares aside.

This is the reason why our government increased the old age security pension by 10% for seniors over the age of 75. As seniors age, they tend to have lower income and are often facing higher health-related expenses because of the onset of illness or disability. Now, thanks to the increase to the OAS, we are strengthening the financial security of 3.3 million Canadian seniors.

Because higher prices on essential goods are causing undue stress, we passed Bill C-46, the one-time grocery rebate, which will deliver targeted inflation relief for 11 million Canadians who need it the most, providing eligible seniors with an extra $234, on average.

Our new dental benefit, as the member mentioned, will help seniors get the dental care they need. That is why, in budget 2023, we proposed to provide $13 billion over five years and $4.4 billion ongoing to help nine million Canadians, including seniors, receive the dental care they need.

These new measures build on the supports that our government has already provided to seniors in the form of program changes, tax breaks and top-ups. Since 2015, we have made significant progress for seniors. To begin, we increased the GIS for nearly a million low-income single seniors. We then restored the age of eligibility from 67 to 65 for GIS and OAS pensions, which the Conservatives had planned to increase this year, if they were still in power.

We enhanced the Canada pension plan, and we reduced income taxes through increases to the basic personal amount. Finally, budget 2022 committed a top-up of $500 to the Canada housing benefit to help low-income renters, including seniors, with the cost of renting, and a one-time doubling of the GST credit for six months.

We are committed to making life more affordable for Canadians, and our government has the record to prove it.

[Rachel Blaney, NDP, North Island—Powell River, BC]

Madam Speaker, it is interesting that the largest impact I see for seniors are things that the NDP asked for. We said to the government, “If you do not play with us nicely, we are not going to support you unless you do these things.” It is great that the government is announcing the things that are in the budget that the NDP proposed, such as the dental benefit and the doubling of the GST. What I am not hearing is anything about how there is going to be real action taken, especially for single seniors. I am worried about all seniors, but I know that single seniors in particular, largely women, are really struggling. They are talking about the financial challenges they have. There are some really common-sense responses that could be done. When is that going to happen?

The other thing I heard the member talk about was the supports for low-income renters. In my riding, there is so little housing. It is not about getting the extra money to pay rent; it is about actually having somewhere to live. Is there going to be an investment in housing that is going to sustain seniors in a meaningful and respectful way?

Those are a couple of my questions. I certainly hope that the member will take it back to his government, that single seniors deserve better and that we need more rental units, especially in rural and remote communities, because there simply are not any there.

[Mark Gerretsen, Liberal, Kingston and the Islands, ON]

Madam Speaker, I certainly did talk about single seniors. I talked about some of the supports that we have. I talked about some of the supports that we introduced years ago and some of the ones that are in budget 2023.

More broadly, to her point about the NDP forcing the hand of the Liberal Party, the NDP can play it any way it wants. I hear it routinely in the House, where this member and other members get up and say that they forced the government to do all these great things. If they want to take credit for it, that is great. The NDP can take credit for it, but at the end of the day, Canadians, and in particular seniors, are better off because of the relationship between the NDP and the Liberals.

I have no problem saying that I am very grateful to this member and the NDP for their willingness to work with this government. They are acting like the adults in the room and that is exactly what Canadians deserve.

Persons with Disabilities

[Mike Morrice, Green, Kitchener Centre, ON]

Madam Speaker, time and again, and we will probably hear it from the parliamentary secretary again tonight, we hear from the governing party that it is keen to move ahead with the Canada disability benefit. However, once again, in budget 2023, the only money allocated was to continue designing the benefit. There is nothing for the benefit itself, leaving people with disabilities living in legislated poverty.

This is why in question period a few weeks ago, I reminded my colleagues in the governing party what it looks like when the federal government is serious about a new program. I gave the example of child care. First came the funding, then agreements with provinces and territories, and then the legislation.

I shared how it is the exact opposite of how it has transpired with the Canada disability benefit and how disappointed I was, and still am, that it again was not funded in budget 2023, despite billions more being set aside to subsidize the oil and gas industry, or even to put a car on the moon. I asked why we should trust that the government is serious about the Canada disability benefit in light of this.

So many of my constituents ask me this same question, and I would like to share just one example of a constituent I recently spoke with, Barb. The Canada disability benefit would change their life. Barb and I spoke in my community office just last Friday. I was told they wanted to discuss their advocacy for expanding medical assistance in dying to include mental health.

We ended up talking for almost an hour, and what I learned over the course of our conversation is that, first, Barb lives in legislated poverty, accessing the Ontario disability support program, or ODSP for short. I learned that because of this, Barb has been unsheltered before and now is precariously housed. I also learned that Barb is keen for more mental health supports, and like me, is deeply disappointed the federal government has not funded the promised $4.5-billion Canada mental health transfer. It is only in light of all of this that they are now advocating to be eligible for medical assistance in dying.

I will tell the House what I told Barb last Friday afternoon, which is that I do not support medical assistance in dying for mental health, in part because I believe the federal government must do far more to support people who need it most, people just like them. It pains me to know there are so many people like Barb in my community and right across the country, people with disabilities who have been organizing and calling out for years for better.

The federal government must listen to them, and it could start by funding the Canada disability benefit today. Failing this, it could at least introduce a disability emergency response benefit similar to what was done in the pandemic as a stopgap measure.

My question to the parliamentary secretary is two-fold. First, if the federal government is continuing to delay bringing in the Canada disability benefit, will it at least bring in a disability emergency response benefit to be sure people such as Barb have the support they need in the meantime? If not, what will the federal government do to show that it really is serious about the Canada disability benefit?

[Mark Gerretsen, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the Leader of the Government in the House of Commons (Senate)]

Madam Speaker, I would like to begin by thanking the member for Kitchener Centre for his advocacy on behalf of Canadians with disabilities.

Furthermore, I would like to thank him for his excellent work in getting Bill C-22 through committee and improving that bill along the way. My thanks again for his tremendous advocacy and great teamwork.

I want to especially acknowledge the advocacy and work of the hon. Minister of Employment, Workforce Development and Disability Inclusion. The minister has been working tirelessly throughout her career to promote the rights of persons with disabilities.

The minister understands the challenges that so many persons with disabilities face each and every day. She understands that many working-age persons with disabilities face a challenging income gap. That is why she has been working tirelessly to create a groundbreaking Canada disability benefit, which the member referenced, an income supplement with the potential to seriously reduce poverty and improve financial security for hundreds of thousands of working-age persons with disabilities.

Like my colleague, the minister wants to see Canadians with disabilities receive the new Canada disability benefit as quickly as possible. I remind the hon. member that, as set out in the legislation, details of the Canada disability benefit will be addressed in further regulations including the benefit amount, eligible criteria and other features. We will work out all of these details in consultation with our partners, including the disability community. We will continue to work closely with the provinces and territories to ensure that the Canada disability benefit will align with and complement services, benefits and supports. I am pleased to report that conversations in this regard are going very well. There is a shared commitment to improving the lives of persons with disabilities across this country.

The Canada disability benefit has the potential to make a profound difference in the lives of hundreds of thousands of working-age Canadians with disabilities. For that to happen we need to take the time to do things the right way. That is exactly what we are doing.

[Mike Morrice, Green, Kitchener Centre, ON]

Madam Speaker, the parliamentary secretary correctly pointed out that the disability community will be involved in the design of the disability benefit because they called for it. Throughout the process of Bill C-22, they made clear the importance of that, so I brought forward an amendment that would require the government to meaningfully engage the disability community in the regulation.

What remains true today is that if the government really was serious, it would not wait for this whole process of regulations and everything else. Just like child care the government would have started by funding it and then moving forward with the rest. Why not do the same here?

[Mark Gerretsen, Liberal, Kingston and the Islands, ON]

Madam Speaker, as I indicated to the member, the consultative process, which he understands, respects and agrees needs to happen, needs to be done in a way that not just engages with the various stakeholders but indeed engages and aligns itself with the provincial delivery of similar services to Canadians with disabilities. We would love to see this happen more quickly. I do not understand why anyone would suggest that it should not happen more quickly, but making this happen will take the necessary time to get it right. What is most important here is that we get it right. That is what we plan to do.

That is why we are going through the process we are now so that we can bring in those regulations and various different stipulations regarding the implementation of this benefit as quickly as we can.

[The Assistant Deputy Speaker, NDP, Carol Hughes]

The hon. member for Leeds—Grenville—Thousand Islands and Rideau Lakes not being present to raise during the adjournment proceedings the matter for which notice has been given, the notice is deemed withdrawn.

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

(The House adjourned at 7:13 p.m.)