Debates of May 2nd, 2023

Criminal Code

[The Assistant Deputy Speaker, NDP, Carol Hughes]

I know the coin means a lot to the member, but I remind him that we cannot use it in the House because it is considered a prop.

Questions and comments, the hon. parliamentary secretary to the government House leader.

[Kevin Lamoureux, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the Leader of the Government in the House of Commons]

Madam Speaker, one of the reasons the government has addressed this issue previously, in part, is because we do value our first responders and our health care workers.

We saw some horrific scenes during the pandemic where people protested against health care workers. All sorts of profanities were levelled against them during the pandemic itself in and around hospitals and other institutions. I suspect there is a great deal of sympathy, for good reason, toward our first responders and health care workers.

This is not something that is new. Sadly, it has been going on for a long time, but it was really emphasized during the pandemic. Would the member agree?

[Todd Doherty, Conservative, Cariboo—Prince George, BC]

Madam Speaker, I would agree with my hon. colleague. Definitely, people are angry. People are frustrated. The rates of violence against our frontline heroes have been increasing in recent years and we must put a stop to it. That is why it is so important that we work together, collaboratively, and pass Bill C-321.

[Don Davies, NDP, Vancouver Kingsway, BC]

Madam Speaker, I would like to congratulate my hon. colleague on this bill. As he knows, it follows a bill that I introduced in 2019 to do the same thing, to make it an aggravating factor in sentencing for there to be an assault on a health care worker.

I noticed that in this bill, he uses the term “health care professional”, and he has expanded the protection to first responders. However, there is no definition of “first responder” or “health care professional” in his bill. I am wondering if he would be amenable to us, at committee, putting definitions in so that we can ensure that the broadest possible coverage is in place to protect our frontline responders and health care workers.

[Todd Doherty, Conservative, Cariboo—Prince George, BC]

Madam Speaker, my hon. colleague and I have talked about this. I agree. It was a mistake on my part at drafting. I should have had “health care worker” to encompass all of those who work in the health care setting. Also, during the work of my bill, Bill C-211, we came to the understanding that there was no definition of “first responder”, but we used “public safety personnel”.

I would work with my hon. colleague to make those amendments.

[Rachael Thomas, Conservative, Lethbridge, AB]

Madam Speaker, I would make the observation that in this place there are quite a few MPs here who do work that gets noticed on social media or even in the mainstream media, and then there are other MPs who just do great work. My hon. colleague is one of those individuals who just do great work.

He is here today talking about the need for legislation around protecting first responders. One of the things we often do not take the time to talk about in this place when we discuss policy is our motivation, our heart, our why. I would invite the hon. member to talk about that.

[Todd Doherty, Conservative, Cariboo—Prince George, BC]

Madam Speaker, the why is very simply that message I received from the paramedic who wrote to me telling me about the assault that happened to her, as well as the work that we have done through Bill C-211, the people we have lost who were first responders, who were health care workers, who we lost to suicide.

This contributes to post-traumatic stress disorder. It contributes to compassion fatigue and burnout. It contributes to those just fearing for their lives when they go to work. Sometimes, there is no way out. They see no way out but to end their lives.

I live and work every day to make sure that we are breaking the stigma and doing whatever we can to protect those who protect us and fight for those who fight for us.

[The Assistant Deputy Speaker, NDP, Carol Hughes]

I do want to remind members that if they want to have conversations, they might want to take them out into the lobby.

I am talking to the hon. parliamentary secretary and the deputy whip. They may want to take their conversation out into the lobby.

Resuming debate, the hon. member for Richmond Hill.

[Majid Jowhari, Liberal, Richmond Hill, ON]

Madam Speaker, I am indeed honoured and very pleased to join the second reading debate on Bill C-321, an act to amend the Criminal Code as it relates to assaults against health care professionals and first responders.

First, let me congratulate the member for Cariboo—Prince George, whom I have had the privilege of working with on a number of projects, especially in terms of mental health. I congratulate him and convey that I will be supporting this bill. It is indeed a pleasure to work with him on this file.

I think all members would agree that health care professionals, personal support care workers, frontline workers and first responders are not just workers. They are co-workers, friends, daughters and sons, and mothers and fathers. They are members of our community. They are the ones who reach out to us. They are extraordinarily empathetic members of our community. Every day, their risk their health to bring a smile to the beautiful faces of our community members. Every day, they risk their lives to save our lives and to protect our communities. They are not just workers; they are heroes. However, these heroes are struggling.

I was fortunate enough to have the opportunity to connect with the amazing SEIU health care workers in Richmond Hill, and I learned about the economic, physical and mental challenges that they combat every single day because of the critical nature of their job. Despite all of this, with ever more fascinating courage and resilience, they continue to work to keep their communities safe. Their tireless effort is simply sparked by passion, love and care.

Richmond Hill firefighters are another group and another inspiring example of first responders. They face physical danger not only while on duty but also as they put on their protective gear for firefighting. This is because the PFAS used in their gear cause severe health effects. This is in addition to the mental impacts of living with the uncertainty of what the next mission on the job holds every moment of every day. It is truly hero-like that, every time, they face the uncertainty with the same bravery and notion of service.

Today I met with the Paramedic Association of Canada. I was given one of those coins that we are not supposed to use as a prop. In light of CMHA Mental Health Week, I would like to highlight the fact that, with the vital and high-pressure nature of their jobs, paramedics are exposed to severe mental and psychological pressures. This issue is exacerbated by the increasing violence and number of assaults they face, all while they passionately maintain the health and safety of their fellow community members.

Health care workers and first responders put their lives on the line every day to keep Canadians and our communities safe. They should never fear for their own safety or feel intimidated as they are going to and from work. Bill C-321 aims to respond to ongoing calls to denounce and deter violence against nurses; paramedics; firefighters; police officers, including transit officers or special constables; and other frontline health care staff. The bill proposes to amend the Criminal Code to require a court to consider the fact that the victim is a health care professional or first responder who was acting in the performance of their duties as an aggravating factor for sentencing purposes. The amendment would apply only at sentencing for cases involving assault-related crimes.

In 2019, as the hon. member mentioned, the House of Commons Standing Committee on Health studied the prevalence of violence faced by health care workers in Canada. It reported that health care workers have a rate of workplace violence that is four times higher than that of any other profession. What is particularly alarming about this figure is stakeholders' report that most of the violence that workers experience remains unreported because of a culture of acceptance. That is not acceptable.

In its report entitled “Violence Facing Health Care Workers in Canada”, the House of Commons Standing Committee on Health made several recommendations, including that the Government of Canada amend the Criminal Code to require courts to treat the fact that the victim of an assault is a health care sector worker as an aggravating factor for sentencing. In light of these calls for reform and the rise in violence against health care workers during the pandemic, our government introduced former Bill C-3, which, when it came into effect in 2021, added to section 718.2 of the Criminal Code an aggravating factor targeting offences committed against any person who, in the performance of their duties and functions, was providing health services. Bill C-321 would complement the amendments enacted by former Bill C-3 by providing additional protection for first responders and expanding the range of circumstances to which the aggravating factor would apply.

First, I want to provide some additional context in relation to aggravating factors. Aggravating factors are circumstances that relate to the seriousness of the offence or the degree of responsibility of the offender and justify the imposition of higher sentences. The Criminal Code contains specific provisions that apply to certain types of first responders. These provisions include, for example, specific offences that capture all forms of assault against peace officers, directing that the sentences imposed for these offences be served consecutively to any other sentence imposed for an offence arising out of the same event.

The proposed aggravating factor in Bill C-321 is consistent with the broad discretion conferred to sentencing judges under section 718.2 of the Criminal Code. The list of aggravating factors provided in this section is not exhaustive, and courts can and do expand the list when recognizing new aggravating and mitigating factors at sentencing. In fact, reported cases in Canada have already recognized that assaulting first responders and persons working in the health care system is an aggravating circumstance at sentencing.

The aggravating factor enacted by former Bill C-3 applies where a victim of an offence was, in the performance of their duties and functions, providing health care services at the time of the offence. However, the beauty of Bill C-321 is that it would apply where a victim was a first responder or health care professional engaged in the performance of their duties. This is a subtle but important difference between the aggravating factor under section 718.2 and the amendment proposed in the bill before us.

The proposed section 269.02 would apply where the victim was performing any other duties, not only those duties relating to the direct provision of health care. For example, even if a firefighter who was assaulted on the job was not providing health-related services at the time of the assault, the aggravating factor proposed in Bill C-321 would still apply.

Our government supports the proposed amendments and would like to suggest replacing the reference to “health care professional” with “person who provides health services”. Our concern is that the term “health care professional” may be interpreted narrowly by the court, which could result in the exclusion of those who work in the health care field but who may not be considered health care professionals. Making such a change would not only result in protection for as broad a class of victims as possible, but the protection they are entitled to would also ensure consistency in terminology between the proposed section 269.02 and the aggravating factor enacted by former Bill C-3 in section 718.2, which applies to persons providing health services.

In closing, our government is committed to addressing the serious issue of violence against health care workers and first responders, such as SEIU health care workers and Richmond Hill firefighters, as well as paramedics. This amendment would, I believe, better achieve the objective of Bill C-321, resulting in expanded protection for all persons working as first responders and working in the health care field.

[Rhéal Fortin, Bloc, Rivière-du-Nord, QC]

Madam Speaker, Bill C‑321 would amend existing provisions governing sentences for assault when the victim is a health care worker or first responder. The victim's profession would be considered an aggravating circumstance.

This bill is based on recommendation 3 from the Standing Committee on Health's report on violence facing health care workers in Canada, which was tabled in June 2019. The committee recommended that the government “amend the Criminal Code to require a court to consider the fact that the victim of an assault is a health care sector worker to be an aggravating circumstance for the purposes of sentencing”.

A number of groups, including the Canadian Medical Association, the Ontario Medical Association, the British Columbia Nurses' Union, the Canadian Union of Public Employees, Concerned Ontario Doctors and the Canadian Nurses Association, have said they support this measure.

The report was tabled in the House on June 19, 2019, so the Trudeau government did not respond to the study before the dissolution of the House and the election. That is why it is back before us now.

Where are we at now? Obviously, assaulting someone who is providing care to a sick or injured person is unacceptable. That goes without saying. The assailant must be punished severely, and the sentence must send an equally serious message. We all agree on that. However, there are already Criminal Code provisions that cover this.

Subparagraph 718.2(a)(iii.2) states that any offence committed against a person who, in the performance of their duties and functions, was providing health services, including personal care services, must be considered to have aggravating circumstances. That applies to any offence, regardless of who the victim and the offender are.

This means that, if passed, Bill C‑321 will merely reiterate that assaults and threats of assault against these workers may be punished more severely.

That is commendable. However, that being said, we need to be careful when determining that one category of citizens should receive special protection. Obviously, we care a lot about making sure that all those who dedicate their lives to caring for, treating or saving their fellow human beings from some sort of danger are well treated themselves. We want them to know that their dedication does not go unnoticed, that it is recognized, and we want them to be able to do their job safely.

However, there are other members of our society who also deserve our respect and attention. I will not give an exhaustive list because I will likely forget someone, but what about our teachers? What about the support staff in our schools? What about day care workers? Many of us who worked in the field of education are well aware of the fact that teaching in 2023 is a far cry from teaching 50 years ago. I think my colleague from Rivière-des-Mille-Îles, who was a school principal not that long ago, could tell us all about that.

Should those who dedicate their lives to educating our children not be given the same consideration? What about those who spend their lives working in soup kitchens or shelters to help the most disadvantaged members of our society? Times are tough. Everything costs more. There is a labour shortage and a housing crisis. There are major problems, and the people working in those areas also need to be recognized and protected.

What message would we like to send to all those who work in a plant, at a courthouse, at a store, at a restaurant or in the public service? What would we say to them, that their work is not important enough? I am sure that is not what we want.

Let me remind this House that in 2015, Bill S‑221 introduced by Senator Bob Runciman was adopted and was rather similar to the current bill, but drafted to the benefit of public transit operators. It did not have a deterrent effect on the violence against bus drivers. Other than a momentary decline in 2016, the statistics on this have not moved, except during the COVID‑19 pandemic. In Quebec, work injury cases recognized by the Commission des normes, de l'équité, de la santé et de la sécurité du travail went from 21 in 2014 to 22 in 2022.

Finally, I would add that our priority must continue to be to assure everyone that we want to keep the workplace, and society in general, safe and healthy. Prevention, and healthy, rewarding living conditions, must never be sacrificed in favour of legislative deterrents. They must be complementary approaches.

In conclusion, the Bloc Québécois believes that acts of violence against health care workers and first responders are concerning and that we need to discuss this. We need to find solutions that make it possible for these people to safely do their essential work.

Does Bill C-321 propose a perfect solution? Probably not, but it surely deserves our attention. For that reason, we will be supporting this bill so it can be studied in committee, ultimately improved and, if appropriate, passed.

[Don Davies, NDP, Vancouver Kingsway, BC]

Madam Speaker, I am pleased to rise today to express, on behalf of my New Democrat colleagues, our support for Bill C-321, an act to amend the Criminal Code, assaults against health care professionals and first responders. Once again, I would like to offer my gratitude and congratulations to my colleague from Cariboo—Prince George for his constant attention and care to our frontline responders in this country. This is a continuation of his fine work in this area.

In brief, this legislation amends the Criminal Code to require courts to consider the fact that victims of an assault were at the time of the commission of the offence a health care professional or a first responder engaged in the performance of their duty as an aggravating circumstance when they are the victim of that offence.

I think it goes without saying that no health care worker or first responder, in this country or anywhere, should ever be subjected to violence in the workplace. Bullying, abuse, racial or sexual harassment, and physical assault should never and can never be considered just part of the job. These workers care for us at our most vulnerable, and I think we have a responsibility to care for them in return.

Violence against health care workers in specific is a pervasive and growing problem in the Canadian health care system. Both the number and intensity of attacks are increasing at an alarming rate. Assaulting a health care worker or a first responder not only harms the individual involved but also puts our entire health care system and first response system at risk. Workplace violence is a major factor driving Canada's dire health staffing shortage, and I am sure it is a dissuading and discouraging factor for people pursing this career.

Workplace violence is a pervasive problem in health care settings across Canada. Prior to COVID–19, health care workers had a fourfold higher rate of workplace violence than any other profession. Incidents of violence against health care workers and first responders escalated dramatically during the pandemic. I might say as well that first responders are often the first people on the scene when we are dealing with Canada's overdose crisis, and I do not think I need to point out how pervasive that is in every corner of the country and the danger it presents to them.

In a 2017 survey, 68% of registered practical nurses and personal support workers reported experiencing violence on the job at least once that year. Nearly, one in five said that they had been assaulted nine or more times that year. According to the Canadian Federation of Nurses Unions, violence-related lost-time claims for frontline health care workers have increased by almost 66% over the past decade. That is three times the rate of increase for police and correctional service officers combined. First responders, notably paramedics and firefighters, also experienced violence and threats on a shockingly frequent basis.

That is why on February 28, 2019, I introduced Bill C-434, an act to amend the Criminal Code, assault against a health care sector worker. That legislation would have amended the Criminal Code to require a court to consider the fact that the victim of an assault is a health care sector worker would also be an aggravating circumstance for the purpose of sentencing. I reintroduced that legislation in successive parliaments in February 2020 and December of 2021.

Although the present bill, Bill C-321, before the House today is very similar to Bill C-434, it does not define a health care worker as broadly. This bill is limited to an assault against “a health care professional or a first responder”, but does not define the terms. The bill I introduced was specifically drafted to ensure that, when we talk about a health care worker, we include not only professionals, but everybody who works in a health care setting, from the porter who greets people at the door, to the orderly and the admin clerk, many of whom experience bullying, abuse and violence. I know my colleague has already indicated that he is willing to look at a broadened definition, and I thank him for that because we want to make sure that this contemplated measure does not exclude any health care sector workers who are not members of professional bodies.

As has been pointed out by my colleague on the government side, in December of 2021, Bill C-3 was passed in the House, which amended the Criminal Code to enhance protections for health care workers, those who assist them and those accessing health care services, and it received royal assent at that time.

Among other measures, Bill C-3 amended the Criminal Code to make it an aggravating factor in sentencing for any offence when there is evidence that, one, “the offence was committed against a person who...was providing health services, including personal care services,” as a part of their duties or, two, where there is evidence that the offence “had the effect of impeding another person from obtaining health services, including personal care services”.

By the way, I also think it is important to point out that we ensure that this bill is broadly defined to include any setting in which a health care worker may perform health care services, including in the home, long-term care centres or any other non-conventional place other than a hospital.

Unlike Bill C-3, the bill before the House, Bill C-321, broadens that protection, I think very laudably, to apply to first responders who are engaged in their duties but not necessarily engaged in providing health services. This is a welcome improvement. Again, I thank my hon. colleague for broadening this important protection.

Assaulting a peace officer is already a stand-alone offence under section 270 of the Criminal Code. The punishment for assault of a peace officer is no more serious than the legislated sentence for common assault. However, the court is likely to consider that the victim, as a peace officer, is an aggravating factor at sentencing.

The Criminal Code offences in sections 129 and 270 do define public officer and peace officer, but case law on the interpretation of section 2 shows the varying occupations that have been counted as peace officers for the purposes of prosecutions under the Criminal Code in particular contexts. They have been included to define members of the Anishinabek Police Service and military police. However, despite the existence of cases which mention paramedics or firefighters that cite section 270 of the Criminal Code on peace officers, there are none that I am aware of where the person assaulted was a paramedic or firefighter. Therefore, current case law suggests that first responders are not considered peace officers under the Criminal Code. This omission must be rectified and would be rectified by this bill that is before the House.

I have already talked about Bill C-321 employing the term “health care professionals” and how that is not defined in this bill, so we are going to work, I hope collaboratively, to ensure that that definition is broadly expanded. It is similar with first responders, who are not defined in this bill because the Criminal Code does not define this term. Other federal statutes do not either, so it will be important for us to have a good, broad description of that to ensure that any person in this country who is providing first response services in our communities is covered by this legislation.

I want to just mention that this is an important step because the Criminal Code is an expression of society's values and priorities. I think sending a message to the Canadian public that these health care workers are taking care of us, that they deserve to be protected and are inviolate is an important message for Parliament to send.

I am not sure I understood completely the comments by my hon. colleague from the Bloc Québécois. He did mention some important points about broadening this protection to many other kinds of workers, but there is one key difference. Health care workers and first responders do a job that we ask them to do. We ask them to be there for people when they are in trauma, and we are putting them in a situation that regular workers are not often in. They have no choice but to be there. They have to be there. That is why I think it is particularly important to send the message that they are inviolate and we must protect them. We have to send a message that under no circumstances is it ever acceptable to violate those people, either by word or deed.

Finally, I want to recognize that, as important as this bill is, it is only a first step. To keep health care workers and first responders safe, they need resources and tools. We want to prevent them from getting assaulted in the first place so they need proper security. They need proper physical barriers. They need sufficient staffing.

We all need greater mental health supports because we also have to recognize that many times the people who are doing the assaults are in some cases victims and are suffering from mental illness and trauma themselves. We have to recognize that we need a comprehensive holistic approach to this problem so we are doing everything we can to prevent the situations that often lead to assaults from happening in the first place instead of dealing with the sentencing after the assault occurs.

[Stephen Ellis, Conservative, Cumberland—Colchester, NS]

Madam Speaker, my hon. colleague from Cariboo—Prince George, who introduced Bill C-321, said he could go on about this particular topic for hours and perhaps years if we allowed him to. As I listened very carefully to his speech, it made me very emotional to hear the harrowing stories that have been told to him. Of course, we know that those things are difficult to hear and difficult to understand.

As I have said in the House before, I have been a family doctor. I graduated from medical school 30 years ago. It is difficult to understand, very carefully, what people have to put up with day in and day out. When someone works in an emergency room, they will, every day, see paramedics and nurses and, as we say in Nova Scotia, LPNs, and CCAs, support workers and other staff who work inside the hospital and have suffered violence. That is something that becomes very hard to understand. For those who are not interested in perpetrating violence, it becomes very hard to understand how someone could possibly have any interest in harming the person who is there to help them. For the majority of people around this country who are listening in this evening, I am sure that does not compute. However, it is important that we make it very clear to the Canadian public that this does happen and that it happens on an everyday basis.

Underlining that fact with some personal experience is something that is very important. We can all talk about numbers. We can talk about the percentage of paramedics in Ontario and Nova Scotia. Sixty-seven per cent of them were verbally abused and 26%, in 2014, had been subject to a physical assault. In North Bay, Ontario, 60% had endured violence, including sexual harassment and physical assault. We all know very clearly that this has no place in the workplace. The strange fact, though, is that it happens in the health care workplace, where health care is being delivered, which, as we have heard from multiple members, could be at the side of the road or in a hospital setting, a nursing home or the person's own home. We know very clearly that this happens.

I have heard the word “hero” used here this evening. It is heroic, in a sense, that the workers who endure this kind of violence show up to work again. It is inexplicable. There really are no words for it. If this type of violence occurred in another workplace, it would very likely be a career-ending injury for many folks. In the health care field, as strange as it is, perhaps owing to the fact that many health care workers are there because they have a heart for the work, they show up to that work again and again, in spite of being abused verbally, physically and, sadly, also sexually. Have I seen this happen? Yes, I have seen it happen, and that presents a very difficult situation. The verbal abuse endured by frontline medical staff in 2023 is beyond belief. People who believe that they can take their frustrations out on other people has, sadly, become some sort of weird, acceptable situation in our society. My friend and colleague from Cariboo—Prince George brought that forward in a very eloquent and elegant manner.

Understanding that, of course, there is frustration with the medical system, we know very clearly that those frontline workers are not in charge of the medical system. They are not the administrators of it. They are not the funders of it. However, those folks who are frustrated by the level of care they have received and the time they have waited still feel it appropriate to lash out at those frontline health care workers who, we know very clearly, are there to help and have gone into these professions with very good reason and a clear conscience.

We know, sadly, that in our society, many frontline health care workers, especially nurses and often paramedics, are females. We also know, sadly, that is a particular difficulty because certain individuals of our society feel the need and, perhaps the superiority, I do not know what goes through their minds, to lash out at females in our society. This appears to be something that happens much more regularly, and, obviously, this is borne out in studies. I have a daughter, Samantha, who is a paramedic. We have that kindred shared relationship to understand the things that she has seen and experienced. She is a tough cookie. She was a rugby player in university. However, we can all understand very clearly that having those things said and done to one certainly takes its toll over time. Once again, it has been said very clearly that that contributes to compassion fatigue, burnout and the reason why people begin to leave their profession.

Especially in today's day and age, when we know that there is a significant need for nurses, paramedics, physicians and any type of health care worker, it must not help them to think they are not being supported by their society. This is an epidemic, which is a bit of an overused word, but it is an epidemic of violence against frontline health care workers. For those who choose to work in these professions, it is important to understand that there are 338 of us in the House of Commons who want to support them and to say that the violence that they endure, sadly, on a regular basis is not acceptable, and that it needs to be a mitigating factor when perpetrators of such violence are brought to justice.

We need to get to the root causes, to understand what we could do as legislators to help with prevention, what we could do as legislators to help change this country so that the attitude is different. We know that those steps are all so important. Certainly as an interim step, allowing frontline health care workers to know that we are there, from all across this country, to support them is going to be a necessary and important step so that they know they are not forgotten.

I do not think it would be helpful to the House or those listening at home to continue to talk about the terrible cases we have heard about very clearly this evening. I will not belabour those points, other than to be very clear that I would challenge my colleagues in the House, not only those who spoke but also the folks who would have the opportunity to pass this bill on to committee and to perhaps make amendments there. I challenge them to make a bill here that, when it goes to committee, is even better. It is not that I want to criticize my colleagues, but let us not weaken this bill; let us strengthen it. Let us make it broader. Let us define those things that need definition. Let us not let perfection be our enemy and allow this bill to not get into the great laws of Canada. I think that is the challenge we have.

I spoke about another challenge in the House before. I believe that we actually have an opportunity here to do something. There are so many days when coming to the House of Commons can be very frustrating. Quite honestly, oftentimes, not much happens and not much gets done. There is a lot of talking and there are a lot of words, but there is not a lot of action. This bill is something that we could have as an actionable and effective tool to help reduce the violence against frontline health care workers. When we have an opportunity in the House of Commons to actually operationalize something, then we need to seize that opportunity with both hands and be able to move that forward so it becomes the law of this great country. My colleague from Cariboo—Prince George has captured a moment in time that is going to allow us, with the support of all of my colleagues, to do that here in the House of Commons. I hope that we are able to do that, because it is something that would be transformative.

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

Madam Speaker, I am very happy to hear the support for this bill in the House today. I want to congratulate the member for Cariboo—Prince George for bringing it forward. There is great opportunity in this bill to further ensure that those who go out, as he indicated in his speech, to protect Canadians and to quite often stand in the way of harm would be given further protections in terms of the consequences for those who seek to harass or intimidate them. I must admit that, when listening to the debate in the House today and when reading the contents of the bill, the first thing that popped into my mind was what was happening in the middle of the pandemic. People were trying to survive, were falling asleep or being deprived of sleep. They were trying to enter Kingston General Hospital, in my riding of Kingston and the Islands, and were being subjected to harassment and intimidation by protesters, believe it or not, on the street.

I totally respect and understand that the people who choose to put their names forward and are elected to the House could be subject to that from time to time, but I completely disagree that anybody who is simply following the policies and legislation enacted by the various different levels of government should ever have to be subject to that. They are just there to do their job, as the member for Cariboo—Prince George pointed out so well.

Perhaps I will have time to expand a little further in the second hour of debate on this. I am hopeful that the discussion at committee will be a productive one, that we can perhaps identify some weaknesses in the bill, strengthen it and look for other opportunities to make it even better.

[The Assistant Deputy Speaker, NDP, Carol Hughes]

The time provided for the consideration of Private Members' Business has now expired, and the order is dropped to the bottom of the order of precedence on the Order Paper.

Pursuant to order made on Thursday, April 27, I do now leave the chair for the House to go into committee of the whole to consider Motion No. 24 under government business.

(House in committee of the whole on Government Business No. 24, Mrs. Carol Hughes in the chair)

Red Dress Day

[The Deputy Chair, NDP, Carol Hughes]

Before we begin this evening's debate, I would like to remind hon. members of how proceedings will unfold.

Each member speaking will be allotted 10 minutes for debate, followed by 10 minutes for questions and comments.

Pursuant to order made on Thursday, April 27, the time provided for the debate may be extended beyond four hours, as needed, to include a minimum of 12 periods of 20 minutes each.

Members may divide their time with another member, and the Chair will receive no quorum calls, dilatory motions or requests for unanimous consent.

We will now begin tonight's take-note debate.

[Mark Holland, Liberal, Leader of the Government in the House of Commons]

moved:

That this committee take note of Red Dress Day.

[Leah Gazan, NDP, Winnipeg Centre, MB]

Madam Chair, I will be splitting my time with the member for Nunavut.

It was a monumental day today having all members of the House recognize the crisis of murdered and missing indigenous women and girls and two-spirit transwomen, a Canada-wide crisis, because it is a crisis. How many tragedies do we have to endure before appropriate action is taken? We are seeing constant, unrelenting violence against our women, girls, two-spirit people and transwomen.

Rebecca Contois, Morgan Harris, Marcedes Myran, Buffalo Woman, Linda Beardy, an eight-year-old girl in Samson Cree Nation: I send my love and sympathies to their families, but they deserve justice. Almost every week we learn about new and heartbreaking stories of sisters who have gone missing or who have been murdered.

We cannot let this be normalized. It is not normal because this is a result of vile human rights violations, something that the current Prime Minister likened to an ongoing genocide. I want to acknowledge our trans sisters and gender non-conforming relatives who face a heightened risk of violence, particularly with the rise of anti-trans hate and a woeful lack of funding and support.

Too often they are forgotten when we speak about this ongoing genocide. I want to say to our trans sisters that I see them, that they are sacred and they deserve to have space in every circle, even when they are forgotten.

Three years since it was announced, the federal government's violence prevention strategy to address the crisis of murdered and missing indigenous women and girls is mostly unspent, only 5%, just $37.1 million out of a fund of $724.1 million.

Not a single new shelter or transitional home has been built. How much longer do we have to wait for this life-saving money to get out the door? How many lives are going to be lost? How many women are going to disappear without action, without a safe place to go?

To make matters worse, we have learned that the Liberals are cutting $150 million from women's shelters in September. Over 600 shelters will have less resources to help people fleeing gender-based violence, rates of violence that we know have increased since the pandemic. The pandemic might have shifted but gender-based violence is on the rise and this government is turning its back on people needing safe places to go. That $150 million could be used to save lives. They need to be providing more resources, not less, because lives are at stake.

The solutions to the crisis are there. Listen to the national inquiry's 231 calls to justice, to families, survivors, advocates. Listen to the young people who are fighting on the front lines, who often do not even have space to speak at the table, young people who are being impacted by violence.

Families and survivors were clear today. They are calling for a Canada-wide emergency, to start work immediately on developing and implementing a national red dress alert system, to create a guaranteed livable basic income and immediately carry out prevention initiatives that honour the rights of indigenous women, girls, trans and gender non-conforming individuals, including but not limited to a right to health, a right to culture, the right to security and the right to justice.

This funding needs to be directed toward indigenous women, youth, children and indigenous-led and serving organizations.

It is time for the government to heed the call. This threat and this ongoing genocide deserve urgency. We are not disposable. People in the hundreds took to the streets in Winnipeg declaring that we are not garbage. We are not garbage. We deserve justice now.

[Blake Desjarlais, NDP, Edmonton Griesbach, AB]

Madam Chair, the member for Winnipeg Centre has been a tireless advocate for justice, for decency and for bringing our sisters home.

It is no secret that this prolonged and continuous genocide is persistent. It is persistent not only in the forms it has taken, such as violence against women or the results of poverty we are seeing, but it is also nefarious in the way the government operates. It is nefarious that it continues to limit the funding necessary to get to the organizations that need it most.

We have young people who are present with us today who need these kinds of resources. They need the support of their government to put that money into their pockets so they can do the work of community life saving.

Can the member speak about the importance of young people and their contributions to ending this crisis?

[Leah Gazan, NDP, Winnipeg Centre, MB]

Madam Chair, as I mentioned, young people are on the front lines of this issue. They need to be supported. They need to be supported in this life-saving work. They need mentorship. They need to work with youth as peers and help each other stay safe.

We have so many kids who age out of care onto the streets. Do members know who is stepping up? It is other young people with common experiences. We need to immediately invest in places for kids aging out of care. We need to support youth organizations that are doing this frontline work to lift people up.

That is what we need. The government talks a good game, but it needs to start investing in youth-led initiatives that save the lives of other young people.

[Jamie Schmale, Conservative, Haliburton—Kawartha Lakes—Brock, ON]

Madam Chair, my colleague's motion today mentioned the red dress hotline, something every party supported earlier today when asked to do so.

I want to make a link to how the government responds to something so important. We had a call many years ago regarding a three-digit hotline for mental health support, which the government took its time implementing, despite a clear deadline to do so.

Does the member from the NDP anticipate the Liberals will deal with the red dress hotline the same way they dealt with the three-digit mental health hotline?

[Leah Gazan, NDP, Winnipeg Centre, MB]

Madam Chair, I think I just have to look at what has been going on so far. It has been almost four years since the national inquiry. In 2020, the government released $724.1 million to address the crisis of murdered and missing indigenous women and girls. The money is there. How much has it spent? Only 5%. No new shelters and no new transitional homes have been built.

This system is already in place. All we need is the political will to put it in place. We have Amber Alerts for child. We have weather alerts. This system is already in place.

I have spoken to a minister across the way about this initiative. We were planning to set up meetings, but we do not need to meet for the sake of meetings. We need to meet with a tangible goal to have immediate action. There has been enough talking. The government needs to act now as it is costing lives.

[Brenda Shanahan, Liberal, Châteauguay—Lacolle, QC]

Madam Chair, thank you again for the speech and the advocacy that you are putting forward.

What is the role of allyship? It is a big question in my riding. We are neighbours to Kahnawake. We have started some partnership, but perhaps you could talk about allyship in advancing this work.

[The Deputy Chair, NDP, Carol Hughes]

I just want to remind the hon. member she is to address questions and comments through the Chair and not directly to the member.

The hon. member has 40 seconds to respond.

[Leah Gazan, NDP, Winnipeg Centre, MB]

Madam Chair, whenever there is violence, it is everybody's problem. Nobody should ever ask permission to do something about violence. We are talking about indigenous people. We are talking about indigenous women and girls, transgender women and young people. Nobody needs to ask permission. It is about political will.

Not acting or finding reasons not to act at this point when the Prime Minister has recognized it as an ongoing genocide and our Parliament has recognized it as a Canada-wide crisis, is an excuse. It is an excuse. We need to stop with the excuses. The government needs to act now.