House of Commons photoLost his last election, in 2019, with 39% of the vote.
Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship June 8th, 2016
Mr. Speaker, St. Andrew's Presbyterian Church in Kitchener has raised $70,000 to privately sponsor a Syrian refugee family.
This family passed all needed security and health checks in February, but is still waiting to come to Canada. The church and family were told they would arrive in Canada by the end of February. Well, here we are three months and $7,000 later, and all anyone has received is a form letter from the Prime Minister.
Why have the Liberals failed one more Syrian refugee family?
Petitions June 6th, 2016
Mr. Speaker, I have the honour to present two petitions today from across Canada. The petitioners are calling on Parliament to provide adequate safeguards for vulnerable Canadians, especially those with mental health challenges, to provide clear conscience protections for health care workers at institutions, and to protect children and those under 18 from physician-assisted suicide.
Business of Supply June 2nd, 2016
Mr. Speaker, it is interesting to hear colleagues talk today about the fact that so many people voted for this particular method of electoral reform. This promise was put into a platform with dozens or perhaps hundreds of promises, yet my colleague suggests that constituents voted for this particular one out of all of the others. My colleagues often argue about the inadvisability of omnibus bills, yet a platform is just that. People pick and choose the items they will vote for and what kind of response they expect. There were a number of promises made in the Liberal platform that people may have voted for. They may have voted for small business tax cuts, but that one did not quite work out. The $10-billion maximum deficit did not work out. We are still not seeing action on restoring door-to-door mail delivery or on the banning of partisan advertising. None of these have worked out.
My colleague can host town hall meetings and he can go on Twitter, but the percentage of people from his riding who will get to a town hall meeting at best, if his number of 250 is accurate, is one-quarter of 1%. A referendum could actually access between 60% and 90% of Canadians. Why would my colleague not allow more Canadians to have a say on this very crucial matter?
Physician-Assisted Dying June 2nd, 2016
Mr. Speaker, over the past several months, the Liberal government has refused to amend Bill C-14 legislation in order to provide adequate conscience protection for medical professionals and health care institutions.
They also voted against our opposition day motion that would have guaranteed these professionals their charter right freedom of conscience. Repeatedly we have heard the government indicate that we can count on provincial regulatory bodies to provide conscience protection. However, as we have seen, the Royal College of Physicians and Surgeons of Ontario and the College of Physicians and Surgeons of Saskatchewan have both indicated that there is an expectation on the part of their medical professionals to refer for the practice of physician-assisted suicide.
Enough is enough. Constituents in my riding have been crystal clear. This bill must include clear, ironclad conscience protections for health care professionals and institutions. I hope the Liberal government will listen to Canadians and do the right thing.
Business of Supply June 2nd, 2016
Mr. Speaker, I want to thank my colleague for his incredible knowledge of this issue and his articulate way of expressing the needs of the House, and in fact the needs of all Canadians.
One thing we keep hearing over and over again from the government, and even from NDP colleagues, is that we need to find a way to engage with those who have been unwilling or unable to participate in the past. I am having trouble identifying who that might be. I wonder if my colleague would have any input into what could be behind the idea of trying to engage more with people, who they say are unwilling to or have been unable to participate.
In the last election, there was an incredible increase in people who were able to engage, willing to engage, and wanted to engage. I wonder if my colleague could comment on that.
Criminal Code May 31st, 2016
Mr. Speaker, repeatedly throughout the day today, and even last night in the vote, we saw a reticence on the part of primarily the Liberal Party to accept the recommendation and the amendment that would guarantee conscience rights for medical professionals and institutions. Repeatedly they have indicated that we can count on provincial regulatory bodies, which will care for this and conscience protection will be guaranteed. However, as we have seen, the Royal College of Physicians and Surgeons of Ontario and Saskatchewan have both indicated that there is an expectation on the part of their medical professionals to at least refer for the practice of physician-assisted suicide.
Would my colleague on the other side not agree that at the very least, if we are to have a bill that goes down the path of allowing physician-assisted suicide and voluntary euthanasia, we should guarantee in law, in the bill, that physicians and health care institutions will not be obligated to act against their moral conscience?
Criminal Code May 31st, 2016
Mr. Speaker, I want to thank my colleague from Windsor—Tecumseh for her statement. Earlier today her colleague from Saint-Hyacinthe—Bagot indicated that doctors who do not wish to participate in physician-assisted suicide must at least make an effective referral.
I want to point out that, “...forcing a physician to refer for assisted-suicide would infringe the physician’s freedom of conscience and religion. From the physician’s perspective, referring is a form of participation because, by acting as a step in the process, the physician is directly helping the patient obtain the service”. That is from a National Post review.
Would my colleague not agree that there needs to be more clear, unequivocal protection for conscience rights for medical doctors and for institutions that do not wish to participate in any form in physician-assisted suicide?
Criminal Code May 31st, 2016
Mr. Speaker, I want to thank my colleague, whom I had the privilege of working with on the Special Joint Committee on Physician-Assisted Dying, for her input.
I am pleased to hear that she is going to vote against this bill. She is voting against it for different reasons than I am, but I would like to ask her this. It looks very probable, based on last night's vote, that this bill will pass, at least in the House. Assuming the bill passes, would my colleague at least agree that we have to do better on conscience protection?
Right now, there is a weak statement in the preamble, which is not part of the bill. There is another statement in the actual bill that says nothing compels an individual to participate, but there is no ironclad protection for physicians, medical workers, and medical professionals, and especially for institutions. I wonder if my colleague would agree that there should at least be more robust protections in this bill for medical workers, and health care institutions.
Criminal Code May 31st, 2016
Mr. Speaker, I could not agree with my colleague more concerning the job of the Supreme Court and the job of this legislature. The Supreme Court has overturned the will of this legislature, which has been expressed probably 15 times since 1991, clearly rejecting initiatives to allow physician-assisted suicide. Therefore, I agree with my colleague on that.
I have a question for my colleague that is actually posed by Dr. Will Johnston, a medical doctor from Vancouver. He says:
...can you imagine end of life care so good that you would set aside your demand for assisted suicide? If you can, let's continue to create such care. If you can't or won't, your focus would seem to be on suicide rather than the relief of suffering and you are likely to do more harm than good.
Does it actually give Canadians a real choice when we currently have palliative care only available to approximately 30% of our population of those who would need palliative care? Does it give them a choice if we offer them physician-assisted suicide on one hand, but cannot offer them actual available, affordable palliative care on the other?
Criminal Code May 31st, 2016
Mr. Speaker, I want to commend my colleague for his very heartfelt remarks and identify with him in the loss of close relatives.
One of the misleading points that has been said over and over again in the House is the percentage of Canadians that support euthanasia, physician-assisted suicide. Inevitably the Liberals are quoting statistics that relate to a terminal illness. The bill has nothing to do with terminal illness.
My question goes back to the issue of conscience protection. We heard many Liberal colleagues refer to the protection in the preamble, which says:
Whereas nothing in this Act affects the guarantee of freedom of conscience and religion;
Then on page 8, in proposed subsection 241.2(9), it says:
For greater certainty, nothing in this section compels an individual to provide or assist in providing medical assistance in dying.
Those are fine sounding statements, but there is no ironclad protection for the medical professional to not be involved in physician-assisted suicide or euthanasia. There is no protection for him or her not to have to refer or make an effective referral, and more importantly, there is absolutely no protection for institutions that were created by volunteers, are staffed by volunteers, and are run by donations of individual Canadians, hospices that were set up with the express purpose of helping people through those final days of life.
Why would my colleague not ensure that, at the very least, physicians, medical workers, medical professionals, and institutions have that conscience protection to allow them not to participate in something they find morally objectionable?