House of Commons photoWon his last election, in 2025, with 64% of the vote.
Points of Order June 2nd, 2023
Madam Speaker, I believe we have gone to orders of the day. We have a private member's bill that is scheduled to go forward, and out of courtesy to the member, which we always give to those who bring forward private member's bills, it is important that we give due consideration and time for that.
I would respectfully ask my colleagues to move forward, and if there are further submissions on this matter, perhaps we can take it up at a later time.
Justice June 2nd, 2023
Madam Speaker, Canadians deserve to feel safe and to be safe.
That is why we introduced Bill C-48, a targeted reform to update our bail laws, designed to focus on violent, repeat offenders, gun and knife violence, as well as intimate partner violence.
If I may, I will repeat what I said earlier. This is from the Canadian Association of Chiefs of Police.
The officials said the following about Bill C-48: We appreciate the fact that the minister worked with the party to introduce this common-sense bill that responds to concerns—
Public Safety June 2nd, 2023
Madam Speaker, I would like to just repeat what I was saying earlier.
With Bill C-48, introduced a couple of weeks ago, we have nearly unanimous support from across provinces, as well as from police leadership. I want to quote again from the statement from the Canadian Association of Chiefs of Police, which said that it commends the federal government for acting on the urgency for legislative change and for recognizing that the proposed amendments are important. The statement also says, “We are convinced that the legislative changes put forth in Bill C-48 will go a long way to help eliminate the preventable harm and senseless tragedies attributable to violent and repeat offenders across Canada.”
Justice June 2nd, 2023
Madam Speaker, Canadians deserve to feel safe and be safe.
That is why introduced Bill C-48, a targeted reform to our bail laws, designed to focus on violent repeat offenders, gun and knife violence, and intimate partner violence. This bill is the product of collaboration with the provinces and territories.
I want to quote from the Canadian Association of Chiefs of Police, which said, “We are convinced that the legislative changes put forth in Bill C-48 will go a long way to help eliminate the preventable harm and senseless tragedies attributable to violent and repeat offenders across Canada.”
I invite the Conservative Party—
National Day Against Gun Violence June 2nd, 2023
Madam Speaker, today is the inaugural National Day Against Gun Violence. For far too many in our country, gun violence is a deeply personal tragedy that has claimed loved ones, shattered dreams and robbed our sense of security.
Many will recall the Danzig Street shooting in the summer of 2012 in my riding of Scarborough—Rouge Park. A gunman fired into a crowded block party, killing two young men and wounding 22 others. Even with the passage of time, the pain and loss linger. Let us honour the memories of victims and support the survivors by wearing white, the colour of peace, and raising awareness around gun violence.
As a government, we are taking decisive action to address gun violence with Bill C-21. Today, I call upon the leader of the opposition in the Senate to stop obstructing the passage of this bill.
Finally, I want to thank the Toronto Raptors for their collaboration and advocacy in making this day a reality.
Business of Supply May 29th, 2023
Madam Chair, my understanding is that both the question and the answer have the same amount of time, so in this case it seems like a bit of an imbalance.
Business of Supply May 29th, 2023
Mr. Chair, in this budget, there are some investments in legal aid. Could the minister talk about how important it is to have a legal system that is accessible and our role in supporting a legal system through additional funding to the legal aid program?
Business of Supply May 29th, 2023
Mr. Chair, I would like to thank the Minister of Finance for her budget and also for her hard work.
I want to talk about an announcement that was made today by the Minister of Justice and the Minister of Crown-Indigenous Relations with respect to the National Family and Survivors Circle, which was given almost $97 million for support for survivors of trauma, stemming from the MMIWG report.
Can the minister tell us how important this is in terms of healing, as well as our path toward reconciliation?
Tamil Genocide Remembrance Day May 18th, 2023
Mr. Speaker, I rise today to mark Tamil Genocide Remembrance Day. Tamils around the world stand in solidarity with victims, survivors and their families in the north and east of Sri Lanka to ensure that we find the truth, hold those responsible for atrocities accountable, and attain justice and peace.
This past January, our government imposed sanctions on four Sri Lankan officials, including Mahinda Rajapaksa and Gotabaya Rajapaksa. They have both been credibly accused of war crimes, crimes against humanity and genocide. These past presidents of Sri Lanka have blood on their hands and cannot evade justice.
As part of our Indo-Pacific strategy, Canada reaffirms our resolve to ensure accountability on the island. Canada will continue to demand accountability by working with multilateral partners, including the United Nations Human Rights Council.
As we mark this day, let us also ensure that the Tamils' inherent right to self-determination in their homeland is entrenched and that they attain peace and security.
Criminal Code May 17th, 2023
Madam Speaker, I thank the member for Abbotsford for bringing forward Bill C-314, an act to amend the Criminal Code regarding medical assistance in dying.
I acknowledge that we are gathered on the traditional unceded lands of the Algonquin people.
The bill before us proposes to indefinitely exclude persons whose sole underlying medical condition is a mental disorder from being eligible to receive medical assistance in dying, or MAID. I will be opposing the bill for reasons I will detail in my remarks. I want to start by providing a brief overview of MAID in Canada.
MAID was legalized in 2016 for persons whose natural death is reasonably foreseeable, through former Bill C-14. Four years later, in 2021, former Bill C-7 expanded eligibility for receiving MAID to persons whose natural death is not reasonably foreseeable. Former Bill C-7 also temporarily excluded, until March 2023, eligibility for receiving MAID on the basis of a mental illness alone.
Parliament decided that a temporary exclusion from eligibility for MAID where the sole underlying medical condition is a mental illness was necessary in recognition of the fact that such requests were complex and required additional study. This is why former Bill C-7 also required an independent expert review regarding recommended protocols, guidance and safeguards to apply to such requests. The expert panel on MAID and mental illness was created to undertake this review, and its final report was tabled in Parliament on May 13, 2022.
Former Bill C-7 also required the establishment of a joint parliamentary committee to conduct a comprehensive review of the Criminal Code MAID provisions and other related issues, including MAID and mental illness. The Special Joint Committee on MAID, or AMAD, took this review and tabled its final report in Parliament on February 15, 2023.
Our government extended the temporary exclusion to March 2024 through the enactment and coming into force of former Bill C-39. This was due to concerns about provincial and territorial readiness. It is important that we get this right.
I want to take a moment to point out that the intention has always been for the mental health exclusion to be temporary. This is a complex, sensitive and polarizing issue. Some very legitimate concerns have been raised.
However, I believe that the health care system will be ready for the safe provision of MAID where the sole underlying medical condition is a mental illness by March 2024. Significant progress has been made by our government, in collaboration with the provinces and territories and other stakeholders and experts, to prepare for this deadline.
We are not ignoring the concerns that have been raised. In fact, many of these concerns led to the one-year extension of the exclusion. We are moving in a prudent, measured way with the ultimate goal of ensuring that our MAID framework supports the autonomy of those who are eligible to receive MAID and protects those who may be vulnerable.
I will now turn to Bill C-314 and outline some of the technical issues.
As I stated previously, the bill proposes to indefinitely exclude eligibility for MAID based on a mental disorder alone. It would do this by replacing “mental illness” with “mental disorder” in subsection 241.2(2.1) of the Criminal Code.
There are two main issues with this approach. First, such a change may result in the unintended exclusion of persons with some medical conditions that are not currently excluded from eligibility for MAID. This is because “mental disorder” is a clinically defined term that practitioners have explained would likely capture all mental disorders included in the American Psychiatric Association's “Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders”, or DSM-5, whereas “mental illness”, as it relates to MAID, is meant to capture mental disorders that are primarily treated within the domain of psychiatry.
“Mental illness” likely captures a smaller set of conditions than what would be captured by “mental disorder”. As such, making the switch in terminology without an accompanying definition may have the unintended consequence of excluding certain medical conditions that are not currently excluded from eligibility for MAID and that do not raise the same concerns as “mental illness” does in relation to MAID.
The second issue is that the term “mental disorder” is already defined in section 2 of the Criminal Code as “a disease of the mind”, and there is extensive case law interpreting what this means in the context of the “not criminally responsible” regime. Therefore, a switch in terminology in the Criminal Code MAID provisions without an accompanying definition may unintentionally complicate legislative interpretation and may also result in the existing case law interpretation of “mental disorder” and the “not criminally responsible” regime context being applied to the MAID context.
Although many experts and practitioners have noted a preference for the term “mental disorder” since it is a clinically defined term, this preference has already been expressed in the context of developing protocols, standards or guidance for MAID. It is important to remember that MAID is not just a health care issue. It is also a criminal law issue, and as I have just explained, things can get complicated in the legislative context given existing definitions and legal interpretations.
Finally, I simply want to point out that Bill C‑314 also restructures the exclusion set out in the Criminal Code but does not seem to change its application.
Currently, in order to be eligible for MAID, a person must have “a grievous and irremediable medical condition”, which is present when a person has a serious and incurable disease or disability, is in an advanced state of irreversible decline and is experiencing enduring and intolerable suffering, as per subsection 241.2(2).
Right now, a mental disorder is not considered an illness, disease or disability under the first part of the definition of a grievous and irremediable medical condition.
As such, a mental illness cannot satisfy the definition and therefore cannot be grounds for a request for MAID.
Under the proposed new exclusion, a mental disorder would not be considered a grievous and irremediable medical condition at all. In other words, it would exclude mental disorders from the whole of the definition, even though some of those aspects may well exist in the case of a mental disorder, namely intolerable suffering and an advanced state of decline. Although this new exclusion would operate slightly differently than the existing exclusion, it seems as though its effects would be the same.
I want to reiterate that Parliament considered this two years ago during its consideration of former Bill C-7 and decided that a MAID mental illness exclusion should be temporary. The point was reinforced by Parliament's enactment of former Bill C-39 this past March.
The expert panel on MAID and mental illness has tabled its final report, which notes that the existing MAID eligibility criteria and safeguards, supported by other key resources, provide an adequate framework for the provision of MAID where the sole underlying medical condition is a mental illness. Parliament considered the issues again via the Special Joint Committee on MAID, and the majority of members agreed with the expert panel's findings.
I urge members to join me in opposing the bill and not reverse Parliament's decision by unintentionally complicating legislative interpretation in the criminal law.