Charlie Angus

[First Nations Child Welfare, December 11th, 2019]

Mr. Speaker, at the outset, let me formally congratulate you on the important role of the Speaker, representing the wonderful region of northern Ontario, and my next-door neighbour. I want to welcome you in your new chair.

I believe if you seek it, you will find unanimous consent for this motion:

That the House call on the government to comply with the historic ruling of the Canadian Human Rights Tribunal ordering the end of discrimination against First Nations children, including by:

(a) fully complying with all orders made by the Canadian Human Rights Tribunal as well as ensuring that children and their families don't have to testify their trauma in court; and

(b) establishing a legislated funding plan for future years that will end the systemic shortfalls in First Nations child welfare.

[Indigenous Affairs, December 11th, 2019]

Mr. Speaker, for seven months the body of 16-year-old Devon Freeman hung on a tree 35 metres from the group home where he disappeared and nobody found him. What a sad symbol that is for this nation.

First nation families are losing their children all the time to what the Human Rights Tribunal has ruled the wilful and reckless discrimination in systemic underfunding by this government.

I ask the Prime Minister to stop with the honey-dripped words and call off the lawyers. Will he commit to meet with Cindy Blackstock to ensure that the Human Rights Tribunal ruling is respected so that no more children die on his watch or our watch?

[Business of Supply, December 10th, 2019]

Madam Speaker, I would like to ask my hon. colleague about one of the other issues that has not really been talked about much, which is the threat that fentanyl has been playing in our communities. It has devastated rural regions and downtown areas. In the northern reserves, Fort Albany and Attawapiskat, there are states of emergency.

The difficulty of dealing with fentanyl is much greater than the original opioid crisis because there are these black market labs in China marketing fentanyl on the dark web. There is a necessity to have an international regime where we can target and identify the purveyors and sellers of fentanyl so we can stop this. This is a very difficult issue.

I am asking this across party lines because every one of our communities is affected. I will ask for the member's opinion on how our multilateral international effort will stop the trade in fentanyl through these black market factories.

[Business of Supply, December 10th, 2019]

Madam Speaker, my real concern is that Canada has deep ties with China. We have cultural ties and many of our communities have deep ties, yet things have gone terribly wrong since we arrested the Huawei executive and put ourselves in the middle of the trade war between the United States and China. There are people in jail unfairly who are facing extreme conditions. There is a trade war.

There is also the brewing unrest in Hong Kong. Canada can play a huge role in this because of our connection to China and the people of Hong Kong. There is a growing concern about what is going to happen in Hong Kong. We saw what happened in Tiananmen Square.

Given that we now have a very compromised relationship with China, how will we be able to ensure there is pressure to protect the democratic rights of the people of Hong Kong from unfair and arbitrary attack in their fight for democracy in the streets of Hong Kong?

[Business of Supply, December 10th, 2019]

Madam Speaker, I listened with great interest to my hon. colleague and to the Liberal response. There are a couple of issues that are very important here. Our relationship with China right now has been very compromised. We are dealing with a geopolitical situation in the world where we have an American ally with Mr. Trump, who sometimes makes some very problematic decisions that affect Canada. We also have a very aggressive Chinese policy in many parts of the world and we have not taken this issue seriously.

We have Canadians on trial. We have affected canola. We have an issue here where we can come together and establish a special committee, not try and tell a standing committee, which is not the right of Parliament, so we can apprise and look at this issue and find solutions. We can look at the threats being posed, as well as how we start to manoeuvre in the geopolitical world we live in, which is a very different world from what it was 10 years ago.

How does my hon. colleague think this committee could move forward on addressing these issues?

[Business of Supply, December 10th, 2019]

Mr. Speaker, it is very important that we strike this committee. The situation with China is very serious and raises serious questions about how the Liberal government has mishandled this file from the beginning.

We know this was set off because of the arrest of Meng Wanzhou of Huawei, whose company was involved in a serious trade war with American interests, yet we stepped in and arrested her. The President of the United States said that he would intervene if he could get a better trade deal with China, while we were left holding the bag. We have Canadians in prison as a result of it. Canola exports are being threatened because of the stance we took.

What concerns me is this was not very well thought out. We did not take the necessary steps with China to meet with it diplomatically about this move. A former Liberal, who was our diplomat, made very inappropriate comments. Then he was replaced by someone who was a Liberal adviser. It seems that time and again the government puts the interests of the Liberal Party ahead of competent international diplomats with experience. It has put Canadians and our trade negotiations at risk with a country that plays a very serious role.

Why is the minister afraid of bringing this to committee so we can examine her government's failings?

[Supplementary Estimates (A), 2019-20, December 9th, 2019]

The Liberals want to quash the ruling, Mr. Chair. That is what the government is in Federal Court to say. If we look at the Human Rights Tribunal ruling, there is point after point about how to make compensation work, and the government says that it will not compensate; it will litigate. That is the government's position.

I am astounded that the minister is in here telling us that the government cares about the children when the finding says there is willful and reckless discrimination against children who died. The children who died had to be named. When it said there was no evidence unless we brought individual children's names forward, individual children's names were brought forward. That was the policy. Those children died, and children are continuing to die. They will continue to die as long as the government refuses to do the basic funding.

The minister tells us the discrimination has ended. That is not what the Human Rights Tribunal found and that is not what any first nation family in the country will believe.

[Supplementary Estimates (A), 2019-20, December 9th, 2019]

Mr. Chair, I agree with the minister that children are certainly better for it. However, children are better for it because Cindy Blackstock, the AFN and Nishnawbe Aski Nation fought the government at the Human Rights Tribunal, while it was refusing and children died. It has met Jordan's principle because it has been forced to meet it.

I want to refer to the latest human rights ruling, which says that there is sufficient evidence that Canada was aware of the discriminatory practices of its child welfare program and that it did this devoid of caution and without regard for the consequences on children and their families. That is the finding after 12 years, and the government spent $3 million trying to block them every step of the way.

How can we say to crush that ruling, throw that finding out, fight it out in court and trust that the government actually cares about children? The minister's lawyers say that children have not been harmed and to prove that they have, those individual children of four and five years old should be brought in and tested. The tribunal found that the government acted with devoid of caution over the lives of children. That is the finding of the Human Rights Tribunal. Is the Human Rights Tribunal lying or is it the government, which has misled the people of Canada on this?

[Supplementary Estimates (A), 2019-20, December 9th, 2019]

Mr. Chair, I am really glad she raised Jordan's principle, which brings us back maybe four non-compliance orders ago. For the minister's lawyers to say that there is no proof that any child was harmed is a falsehood, because the ruling on Jordan's principle was about the deaths of Jolynn Winter and Chantel Fox. Her government decided that it was not going to bother to fund those children and at the Human Rights Tribunal was forced to implement Jordan's principle. Every single time the minister's government said that it was in compliance and children died because of that.

The government says good things have been done, but let us now throw out the Human Rights Tribunal ruling. How can the minister claim that the government went along with Jordan's principle when the filings show that it fought it every step of the way and children died?

[Supplementary Estimates (A), 2019-20, December 9th, 2019]

Mr. Chair, I am quite shocked because her lawyers are in court saying that there is no evidence any children were improperly taken. How can she stand and misrepresent her lawyers? Then the lawyers said that there was no reason for compensation. They have said that in the hearings.

Now the government wants to quash a legal finding that the tribunal spent 12 years adjudicating, and the minister's lawyers say there was no evidence to prove what was found, which they said was reckless and willful discrimination. How can minister tell us that it is better to have that ruling thrown out so the government can fight children in court and make each of them testify? That is what the government wants to do. How can she justify that?