Gary Anandasangaree

[Small Business, April 27th, 2022]

Madam Speaker, the pressures created by supply chain disruptions and by the shift from buying services to buying goods are real. We are monitoring that situation very closely.

As it relates to inflation, there are other structural costs that make life less affordable for Canadian families, and chief among them are housing and child care. That is why our government has a robust national housing strategy and a child care plan that is covering Canadians from coast to coast to coast. The average Alberta family will save $5,600 this year.

I would like to thank the hon. member for raising the question of inflation and its impacts on small businesses. It is an important issue that is top of mind for our government. In fact, the issue was top of mind when the Deputy Prime Minister and Finance Minister presented the federal budget a few weeks ago: our plan to grow our economy and make life more affordable.

Our government understands that the current inflation crisis is making it harder for Canadians and small businesses across Canada to make ends meet. Increases in prices for a variety of goods are a global phenomenon driven by the unprecedented challenge of restarting the world's economy, as well as the instability of global markets as a result of President Putin's barbaric invasion of Ukraine, which has jolted commodity markets with a surge in prices particularly for oil, natural gas and wheat. Even in that context, I would point out that Canada's inflation is lower than that of the United States, as well as the averages of the G20, the Eurozone and the OECD.

Our government is taking meaningful actions to make life more affordable in this country and to support small businesses as they grow. For example, in budget 2022 our government is proposing to cut taxes for growing small businesses by phasing out access to the small business tax rate more gradually, with access to be fully phased out when taxable capital reaches $50 million rather than $15 million. It would deliver an estimated $660 million in tax savings over the 2022-23 to 2026-27 period that could be reinvested towards growing and creating jobs. This is concrete support for Canadian small businesses, and there is a lot that we can be proud of in our budget.

As well, our government has cut taxes for the middle class while raising them for the top 1%, and we are working to address housing affordability. We have now signed agreements with all provinces and territories to implement a Canada-wide $10-a-day community-based early learning and child care system that would make life more affordable for families, create new jobs, get parents back into the workforce and grow the middle class, while giving every child a real and fair chance at success.

As we can see, our government is already working hard to make life more affordable for Canadians and to help small businesses make ends meet.

[Justice, April 27th, 2022]

Madam Speaker, Bill C-5 would provide judicial discretion to allow courts to craft proportionate sentences that consider all the relevant circumstances, including factors such as an individual's experience with systemic racism, their history of trauma or their need for community and health supports.

Should Bill C-5 be enacted, the human trafficking regime would not change. Conditional sentences would continue to be unavailable for the offence of trafficking in persons and trafficking of minors. In all cases, courts would continue to be required to impose sentences that reflect the seriousness of the offence and the moral blameworthiness of the offender.

Bill C-5 is an important step toward addressing systemic racism and discrimination in the justice system while also maintaining public safety.

[Justice, April 27th, 2022]

Madam Speaker, I am pleased to have an opportunity to speak to Bill C-5, particularly to dispel some possible misunderstandings about the impact these sentencing reforms would have on the human trafficking regime in the Criminal Code.

Some critics of this bill suggest the proposed reforms would allow hardened human trafficking offenders, who may be linked to organized crime or who are otherwise observing harsh sentences, to serve their sentences at home. This is simply not true.

Currently, all offences that carry mandatory minimum penalties of imprisonment in the Criminal Code are ineligible for a conditional sentence. Bill C-5 would not change this. If the proposed reforms were to pass, offences carrying MMPs would continue to be ineligible for conditional sentences. To be completely clear, the offence of human trafficking, as well as any child-related trafficking offences, carries mandatory minimum penalties of imprisonment and thus would continue to be ineligible for a conditional sentence.

I want to make clear that when there is no MMP for any provision, CSOs can only be considered by the court in a specific set of circumstances. Namely, where a sentence of less than two years is appropriate, where serving the sentence in the community would not endanger the same of the community, and where such a sentence would be consistent with the fundamental purpose and principles of sentencing, including deterrence and denunciation.

Our government is committed to fighting human trafficking. With former bill, Bill C-75, which came into force in June of 2019, we took measures to facilitate the prosecution of human trafficking offences under the Criminal Code.

In September of 2019, we launched the national strategy to combat human trafficking, which brings together federal efforts and is supported by an investment of $57.22 million over five years and $10.28 million ongoing. This builds on previous investments of $14.51 million over five years and $2.8 million per year to establish a Canadian human trafficking hotline, which launched in May of 2019.

In February of 2021, we also launched the national human trafficking public awareness campaign to raise awareness among Canadian youth and parents of the misperceptions of human trafficking and increase understanding of the warning signs.

Our government has taken strong measures to combat human trafficking at it roots, instead of fuelling the ideological tough-on-crime narrative, which has not proven to be true empirically, has not served our communities and has not made us safer nor helped victims.

Let me be very clear. Human trafficking is a serious offence for which courts impose stiff, denunciatory terms of imprisonment in the majority of cases, and that is what we and all Canadians expect from a court system. I have the utmost faith that, after the passage of Bill C-5, sentencing courts would continue to impose fit and appropriate sentences that reflect the seriousness of each offence and the moral blameworthiness of the offender before them in all cases.

[Sri Lanka, April 4th, 2022]

Mr. Speaker, Sri Lanka is facing the most serious financial crisis in its history. The corrupt regime led by President Gotabaya Rajapaksa and Prime Minister Mahinda Rajapaksa is in the final days of governing the failed state. The entire cabinet of ministers has resigned, save and except for Mahinda Rajapaksa.

This is the beginning of the end of the Rajapaksa family. The brothers stand accused of war crimes, crimes against humanity and genocide. As the state seeks a bailout from the International Monetary Fund, it is essential that funds given are not used to support the oversized military with a history of rights violations.

If Sri Lanka is to move forward, it must severely curtail its military spending, return lands to Tamils, repeal the Prevention of Terrorism Act and release all those being held under the act, ensure accountability for international crimes, account for the disappeared and ensure that there is a just political solution that recognizes the inherent right of Tamils to self-determination. Anything short would lead to ongoing instability and chaos on the island.

[Justice, April 1st, 2022]

Madam Speaker, our government is committed to criminal justice system reform. It is a promise we made to Canadians and we intend to keep it. This is about criminal justice policy that actually keeps our communities safe. A justice system that unfairly targets indigenous people and Black and marginalized communities is not effective. It does not keep us safe, and it must be changed.

[Criminal Code, March 30th, 2022]

Mr. Speaker, I want to take the Minister of Justice back to 2019 when we had a round table in Scarborough with a number of different stakeholders who were directly impacted by mandatory minimum sentences, particularly members of the Black community. We know that the statistics are quite relevant here because MMPs have disproportionately impacted members of the Black community, as well as indigenous communities.

Can the minister give us a sense of how the changes to MMPs in Bill C-5 would ensure that fair justice is administered when it comes to racialized and indigenous people, as well as talk about conditional sentencing orders and what kind of impact those would have on sentencing?

[Protection of Freedom of Conscience Act, March 28th, 2022]

Madam Speaker, I am very pleased to speak this morning with respect to Bill C-230, an act to amend the Criminal Code, intimidation of health care professionals, which was introduced by the member for Carlton Trail—Eagle Creek. I want to acknowledge that I am speaking today on the traditional unceded lands of the Algonquin people.

The stated goal of Bill C-230 is to protect an important right: the right to freedom of conscience and religion, which is guaranteed by section 2 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. It is a laudable goal, but one that I do not think the bill achieves. The bill proposes to create two new criminal offences that seek to protect the right of health care professionals, including medical practitioners, nurse practitioners and pharmacists, to object to taking part in the provision of medical assistance in dying to provide services according to their conscience.

First, it proposes the creation of a new intimidation offence that would prohibit the use of coercion or any intimidating behaviour to compel a health care professional to participate, directly or indirectly, in the provision of MAID. Second, it proposes the creation of an employment sanctions offence that would prohibit employers from refusing to employ, or to dismiss, health care professionals solely because they refused to participate directly or indirectly in the provision of MAID.

We certainly all agree that it is imperative that the right to freedom of conscience and religion be protected, not only for health professionals in the context of medical assistance in dying, but for everyone in Canada.

This is central to ensuring that we are able to live our lives, both personally and professionally, with equal rights and dignity. However, I do not believe that the proposed Criminal Code amendments are necessary to protect this central right, so I must oppose the bill.

The proposed intimidation offence, which would prohibit the use of coercion or intimidation to compel a health care professional to participate in MAID, largely duplicates existing Criminal Code offences. For instance, in section 423, the Criminal Code already prohibits the use of violence, threats of violence, intimidation or attempts at intimidation to compel any person to abstain from doing anything that they have a lawful right to do, or to do anything that they have a lawful right to abstain from doing. Criminal Code section 346 also makes it an offence to extort someone, which is to use threats, accusations, menaces or violence to induce, or attempt to induce, that person to do anything or to cause anything to be done. These are both indictable offences and are punishable by maximums of 14 years imprisonment and life imprisonment, respectively.

The existing offences of intimidation and extortion apply in all circumstances, including in the context of the provision of MAID by health care professionals. I believe that these offences provide sufficient protection for health care professionals who do not wish to participate in the provision of MAID.

The proposed employment sanctions offence would prohibit employers from refusing to employ, or to dismiss, health care professionals simply because they refuse to participate in the provision of MAID. This is a valid and important objective, but I urge us to reflect on how such a provision may encroach on provincial and territorial jurisdiction.

As all members of the House are aware, MAID falls under the shared jurisdiction of the federal government, which has jurisdiction over criminal law, and of provincial governments, which are responsible for the provision of health care. However, with the exception of federally regulated sectors, employment-related matters generally fall within the responsibility of the provinces and territories. As such, employment concerns may be more appropriately addressed by the regulation of employers at the provincial and territorial level. Irrespective of jurisdictional issues, I also wonder whether criminal law is the right tool to use to address employment issues.

I am also mindful that, even though the preamble of Bill C-230 suggests that it seeks to respond to circumstances in which practitioners are required to make effective referrals for MAID, the bill would not address that issue because the professional orders that establish those policies would not be captured by the proposed employment sanctions offence.

We must remember that the MAID legislation simply permits the provision of MAID. It does not compel anyone to provide it, whether directly or indirectly. In fact, it contains a provision explicitly clarifying that “nothing in this section compels an individual to provide or assist in providing medical assistance in dying.” This can be found in subsection 241.2(9).

I am not aware of any evidence that suggests that health care professionals are being coerced or intimidated to provide MAID. I wholeheartedly believe that the criminal law already offers protection to anyone who may be coerced to participate in MAID. I would also like to remind members that the criminal law should be used sparingly.

I would also like to note that the proposed offences would offer protection only to health care professionals who object to taking part in the provision of MAID. They would not apply in circumstances where a health care professional may wish to provide MAID but is coerced or intimidated to abstain from providing it. I have to question why we would resort to creating a new criminal offence to protect one health care professional's freedom of conscience but not another's.

Canadians have varied opinions on MAID, depending on their personal circumstances, beliefs and experiences. Despite these diverse views, public opinion research consistently demonstrates strong support for MAID. Our MAID laws recognize the importance of permitting access to MAID as a means of relieving intolerable suffering for competent adults. The laws recognize that those who wish to access MAID should be able to do so, and available statistics show that many Canadians choose to receive MAID.

Since the first legislation in 2016 up until the most recent data released by Health Canada covering 2020, there have been 21,589 medically assisted deaths in Canada. The vast majority of persons who have received MAID had cancer as their main underlying condition, followed by persons who had cardiovascular conditions, chronic respiratory conditions and neurological conditions. This trend is consistent with the leading causes of death in Canada, which list cancer and heart disease as the number one and number two causes of death, respectively. These can be found in the Second Annual Report on Medical Assistance in Dying in Canada 2020.

MAID is a complex and deeply personal issue that engages fundamental rights and interests, both for persons contemplating MAID and for the health care professionals who choose or choose not to participate in the provision of MAID. MAID is anything but straightforward, and we must continue to work together to find appropriate and effective solutions to balance the rights of persons to access MAID with the rights of health care professionals to provide quality care and service in accordance with their conscience. I appreciate the spirit of this bill, but I continue to have real concerns that it would appear to be an improper use of the Criminal Code. I must therefore oppose it.

[Kamalambikai Kandasamy, March 24th, 2022]

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to pay tribute to Mrs. Kamalambikai Kandasamy, a brave mother of the Tamil nation. Throughout 2008 and until May 2009, Mrs. Kandasamy worked day and night as a pharmacist embedded with the Tamil medical team in Mullivaikal. As makeshift hospitals were targeted and bombed by the Sri Lankan armed forces, she fearlessly helped thousands of survivors.

The world ignored her pleas in 2009 but heard her loud and clear as she became a critical witness and voice to the war crimes, crimes against humanity, and genocide of her people. She campaigned for accountability and justice, seeking to end impunity for Sri Lankan officials by speaking at the United Nations Human Rights Council and advocating to our Minister of Foreign Affairs and many other world leaders.

Until her last breath, she supported the mothers of the disappeared, raised money to support survivors and ensured that those who made the ultimate sacrifice were never forgotten, including her only son, Thivaharen.

[Business of Supply, March 22nd, 2022]

Madam Speaker, I would like to get a sense from my friend opposite about the following point. There are a number of provincial Conservative governments in Canada. Could he identify any provincial government that has reduced its taxes with respect to gasoline at this time?

[Black History Month, February 28th, 2022]

Mr. Speaker, “February and Forever: Celebrating Black History today and every day” is the theme for Black History Month this year. I am proud to highlight two important initiatives from my riding that will be embedded in Canadian history this year and beyond.

First, I want to highlight the work of Kwame Delfish, the artist who designed the 2022 Underground Railroad coin for the Royal Canadian Mint to capture the painful history and journey of people of African descent searching for freedom in Canada.

Second, the Scarborough charter brings together over 52 post-secondary institutions to address anti-Black racism and to promote inclusion and equality in higher education. At its core are its guiding principles: Black flourishing, inclusive excellence, mutuality and accountability.

I want to acknowledge the leadership of Principal Wisdom Tettey and his colleagues at the University of Toronto Scarborough campus.

Happy Black History Month.