House of Commons photoWon his last election, in 2025, with 53% of the vote.
Elections Modernization Act May 10th, 2018
Mr. Speaker, the minister talked about using a voter information card and reinstating that as a form of identification. In the last election 986,613 voter information cards were reported to have inaccurate information, were sent to wrong addresses, and had erroneous information.
Can the minister address why he is using as a piece of identification for voters something that for as many as a million voters had inaccurate information?
Business of the House May 10th, 2018
Mr. Speaker, it being Thursday, it is my privilege to ask the Thursday question. I might say as someone who has done a statistical analysis of 30 years' worth of Thursday questions, it is an honour to actually ask the question today.
Could the government House leader inform the House what business the government plans to bring before the House for the remainder of this week and the week we return after our constituency week?
The Leader of the Opposition having designated the finance and citizenship and immigration departments for consideration in committee of the whole, could she inform the House when those two debates in committee of the whole will be scheduled?
Taxation April 27th, 2018
Madam Speaker, the parliamentary secretary is encouraging Canadians to file on time, yet when they do so, the government is clawing back needed benefits from seniors. These are benefits that they rely on.
The Minister of National Revenue seems to relish the opportunity to make life harder for Canadians who are already struggling to get by.
Will the minister finally call off her tax collectors and give Canadian seniors the respect they deserve?
Business of Supply April 26th, 2018
Madam Speaker, the member for Chilliwack—Hope has raised an important point. I would not be nearly quite as polite as the motion is.
We are talking about 150,000 kids. I cannot put into words the feelings of the parents who had their children forcibly taken away from them, the other siblings and other family members, and in so many cases never to see them again. It is tough to put into words how that would affect someone.
It is so important now that we move forward with a reconciliation to try to at least provide some element of closure, some element of acknowledgement.
Business of Supply April 26th, 2018
Madam Speaker, my response is yes. Any institution, the Catholic Church, the entities involved with it, any institution that had a significant role to play in Indian residential schools in Canada must issue an apology. They must issue an apology for the harms that were done. It is important that this apology happen to allow for further reconciliation.
Business of Supply April 26th, 2018
Madam Speaker, the member for Cowichan—Malahat—Langford is right. We as parliamentarians do not speak just for ourselves. We speak for the 100,000 constituents that we represent, and collectively, we speak for the 35 million Canadians who live in this great country.
As Canadians and as parliamentarians, we all have a role to play in reconciliation. We all have a role to play in ensuring that the proper services, the proper funding, the proper resources are available to those who have survived the residential school system, those who have suffered because of the harms of the system.
One of the reasons the residential school apology in 2008 was so powerful was that it was truly endorsed by all members of the House and by all political parties. That apology acknowledged that as a government, as a country, we did wrong. It was a simple acknowledgement that we did not live up to our obligations as a country and as a society. As the House, as the place where we meet, it is our duty to do so.
Business of Supply April 26th, 2018
Madam Speaker, I want to begin by thanking our colleague, the member for Kamloops—Thompson—Cariboo, for her eloquent words on this matter and for sharing her personal story in connection with this important issue. I would like to thank as well the member for Timmins—James Bay for bringing forward this motion today and giving this House the opportunity to debate this important matter.
As Canadians, we rightly have much to be proud of. We have a proud history and a great record of accomplishments, whether they be in the military, science, technology, sports, or medicine. However, while we celebrate our successes as a nation, we must also recognize and acknowledge the times we have failed. During our history, we have done wrong. The institutions established by past governments were responsible for great harm and great pain, and it is for this reason that I will be supporting the motion brought forward today by the hon. member for Timmins—James Bay.
The residential schools were a horrific, dark mark and chapter in our Canadian history. The numbers themselves are appalling. One hundred and fifty thousand first nations, Inuit, and Métis children were removed from their homes, removed from their communities, and forced to attend these schools, and thousands of them died.
In 2008, in this place, Prime Minister Stephen Harper officially apologized for the Government of Canada's role in the Indian residential schools. At that time, he said:
The Government of Canada built an educational system in which very young children were often forcibly removed from their homes and often taken far from their communities.
Many were inadequately fed, clothed and housed. All were deprived of the care and nurturing of their parents, grandparents and communities.
First nations, Inuit and Métis languages and cultural practices were prohibited in these schools.
Tragically, some of these children died while attending residential schools, and others never returned home [again].
I was struck by the comment about the languages. I have the privilege of serving as a member of the procedure and House affairs committee. We are currently undertaking a study of the use of indigenous languages in this place, and it was interesting to hear testimony from different witnesses about indigenous languages and their vitality in the current age. According to UNESCO, from one of the witnesses who appeared before us, of the 90 indigenous languages it surveyed, 23 were deemed to be vulnerable, five were definitely endangered, 27 were severely endangered, and 35 indigenous languages were critically endangered. Much of this endangerment to these languages stems from the fact that so many indigenous children were prohibited from using their languages after they were sent away to residential schools. This was wrong, and it was acknowledged that it was wrong in 2008 when the official apology was issued.
In 2007, the former Conservative government established a truth and reconciliation process and a commission as part of the Indian Residential Schools Settlement Agreement, and it recognized that the Indian residential school system had a profound, lasting, and damaging impact on so many aspects of indigenous culture, heritage, and language.
In 2015, the commission released its report, entitled “What We Have Learned: Principles of Truth and Reconciliation”. In this report, the commission outlined a number of principles of reconciliation. It is pertinent to the debate today to highlight a couple of those principles of reconciliation. The report states:
Reconciliation is a process of healing of relationships that requires public truth sharing, apology, and commemoration that acknowledge and redress past harms.
The commission goes on to state, in point 10, that:
Reconciliation requires sustained public education and dialogue, including youth engagement, about the history and legacy of residential schools, Treaties, and Aboriginal rights, as well as the historical and contemporary contributions of Aboriginal peoples to Canadian society.
I hope that today's debate will contribute to that reconciliation.
I would note that efforts at reconciliation happen across our country. In my community of Perth—Wellington last summer, Stratford Summer Music , a great cultural institution in our riding, highlighted some of the indigenous musical and cultural practices that are so important, and it was able to share that with so many in our community. I thank the organizers for taking that important step.
Today's motion is divided into three key points. The first part of the motion is that the Pope be invited to participate in the journey. As we have already heard so many times this morning, this is a journey. It is not an end location but a journey and a process.
Reconciliation is not easy. It requires many difficult conversations and reflections by individuals, organizations, groups, religious entities, and, indeed, government. As Conservatives, we believe that any group or institution that had a significant role in the residential school system should apologize and help ensure that Canada moves toward reconciliation. Many have already done so. This part of the motion stems from call to action 58 from the Truth and Reconciliation Commission, which reads:
We call upon the Pope to issue an apology to Survivors, their families, and communities for the Roman Catholic Church’s role in the spiritual, cultural, emotional, physical, and sexual abuse of First Nations, Inuit, and Métis children in Catholic-run residential schools. We call for that apology to be similar to the 2010 apology issued to Irish victims of abuse and to occur within one year of the issuing of this Report and to be delivered by the Pope in Canada.
The second part of the motion calls on the Catholic Church to respect its “moral obligation and the spirit of the 2006 Indian Residential School Settlement Agreement and resume best efforts to raise the full amount of the agreed upon funds”. Under that agreement, $25 million would be provided for programs to aid in the healing of survivors. As has been mentioned earlier and has been well reported in The Globe and Mail, a miscommunication between a federal government lawyer and counsel for the Catholic Church led to the church believing that it could walk away from this commitment. This is a profoundly unfortunate error. While the Church may not have a legal obligation, I believe we can all agree that there is no question that there is an urgent moral obligation. Certainly money alone will not heal the pain. Money and an apology will not fix all the problems, but it is an important acknowledgement.
Indeed, last year, our colleagues on the indigenous and northern affairs committee completed a difficult study on the suicide and mental health crisis that far too many indigenous communities are facing. Many witnesses spoke of the intergenerational trauma that has overwhelmed the limited services available.
The report, at page 29, states:
Substance use and mental illness were identified by witnesses as factors which contribute to mental health issues and suicide, affecting youth and their parents. Some discussed substance use as a means to cope with unresolved trauma due to residential school, experiences of abuse or violence, or to forget about difficult living conditions such [as] poor housing or hunger.
This funding and these resources are still needed.
The third point talks about “a consistent and sustained effort to turn over relevant documents when called upon by survivors of residential schools, their families, and scholars”. Again, we believe that these documents will help survivors, their families, and researchers find answers to long-unanswered questions. If it helps in some way to find closure, if it helps in some way with reconciliation, if it helps in some way with healing, we believe that this should be done.
I am pleased to speak in favour of this motion today. I am pleased to vote in favour of this motion. I hope that it will, in some way, help to further reconciliation with Canada's indigenous communities.
Petitions April 24th, 2018
Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to table a petition that was initiated in my riding of Perth—Wellington by Tanner Bergsma, a student at Stratford Central, a school in Stratford.
The petitioners call on the government to increase environmental protections in the resource industry.
Interprovincial Trade April 19th, 2018
Mr. Speaker, the fact is the Comeau case shows that the Liberals are not really committed to internal free trade. The working group that the parliamentary secretary cites has met a number of times, but it will not reveal any details because the government says it would be injurious to federal-provincial relations. How bad are these meetings going that even releasing the names of the attendees would be injurious to federal-provincial relations?
The Attorney General herself argued against Mr. Comeau at the Supreme Court.
Will the Liberals finally stand up for local businesses and consumers, show an ounce of leadership, and free the beer?
Interprovincial Trade April 19th, 2018
Mr. Speaker, today's Comeau decision shows, once again, that the status quo is not an option.
Canadians believe that they should be able to share high-quality Canadian beer, wine, and spirits across provincial boundaries, but pages upon pages of exemptions on alcohol and secretive working groups show that the Canadian free trade agreement has failed consumers and local businesses.
Will the Liberals commit today to allow direct-to-consumer sales of alcohol across the country?