Michael Savage

[Support Measures for Adoptive Parents, October 30th, 2009]

Mr. Speaker, let me congratulate my colleague, the hon. member for Essex, for bringing this motion forward. It is obviously a motion that comes about from personal experience.

Adoption is an issue that affects so many Canadians in so many ways. No adoptions are easy. None of them are cheap. None of them are a short process. All of them take commitment and dedication.

In my own family, like many Canadians, I can look to people who have gone through the adoption process. My brother Patrick and his wife Constance adopted their second child from China. My sister Jane and her partner adopted two girls in Ontario, one of whom I am the proud godfather of.

Members of the House will probably all know about our colleague, the member for London North Centre and his adopted children, Abuk, Achen and Ater. It is one of the more remarkable stories of how he adopted those children in the course of the work that he did in many ways to make the world better. That one is an incredible story of love, commitment and perseverance, but it is also a story of combating long odds, the coordination of Canadian immigration with the provincial government and everything else, and is indicative of the dedication it takes to adopt children and provide a loving home.

We know issues of child trafficking have to be taken care of. We know that in the case of my colleague's process that there were certain things that needed to be done, but we need to salute the tenacity and the perseverance of people who do so much for others and for themselves, and to provide a loving family to receive love as well as to give it.

In the case of my sister and her partner who adopted girls in Ontario, they were the result of difficult births and they have given these children a wonderful upbringing.

In the case of my brother Patrick and his adoption of Ann from China, it was a typical foreign adoption. It took a long time. There was a lot of waiting, hoping and praying. When the time came, even after all that waiting, it came kind of suddenly. It is a complete commitment and a complete change of life going through the adoption process.

I had the chance a few weeks to meet a girl in my riding who is 20 years old, who was adopted at the age of five, who is Down syndrome non-verbal. Alisha requires the help of many people. It is a blessing to her family to have adopted Alisha, but when we look at the financial strain that they have not only when she was a child but throughout of her life because of her condition, that is a remarkable story as well.

Whenever individuals adopt children, it usually requires a huge amount of commitment, whether it is travel overseas or whether it is the process they go through here. In spite of much waiting, quite often when people are in the line to adopt a child, they suddenly get the call and they have to pick up and go. It is life changing in every sense of the word.

For local adoption, it is the same thing. There is a long and cumbersome process. Couples go through stages where their competence and their financial ability to raise a child are questioned and examined.

Before my wife and I were blessed with our own children, we had considered looking at the adoption route. We saw how long it was going to take in Nova Scotia. Then, as I say, we were blessed to have our own children.

There are attachment issues for people who adopt children, and significant emotional and spiritual investments of people who adopt children. In the case of my brother Patrick, he went to China to adopt his second child. He and his wife had their first child Sophie here in Canada. Because Sophie had a minor medical condition that they did not think could be dealt with in China my brother Patrick, the father, actually went to China with my other brother Barney to adopt a child and bring that child back. Two Canadian men adopting a child in China raised a few eyebrows. In fact, on that long flight back she became quite attached to Barney. When they came here, her mother then had to go through that process again which has all worked out very well.

Quite often we hear stories of people who go through this long process at great expense and it does not turn out as they wish. We have the case of Imagine, the organization that we all heard about, that went bankrupt when people were in line to receive children.

I want to again refer to my colleague from London North Centre, who posted on a blog or a website a reaction he had after he met with some of these people. I will quote it because he would never do so himself. It states:

I just came from a meeting with numerous families who have been in the process of adopting overseas children through the Imagine agency that recently filed for bankruptcy. They gathered in reflection and pain and confusion as to what to do next. Some have $30,000 invested in the process and they are hurting. My wife and I were asked to attend because of our own adoption of three children from Sudan and we respectfully accepted the invitation. Following an hour of venting their frustrations and developing plans of action, they asked that I address them as an MP.

Walking to the front, I felt humbled and just a little incapable. What could you say to a group of determined and dedicated families such as these? Yet as I turned to speak to them I saw faces full of longing. They were at sea, slightly lost, with a sense they might be experiencing the end of a dream. Emotion ran through me as I comprehended that they were looking to government to make it happen, to bring about a successful resolution to the difficulties. What followed was a heart-to-heart, like few times I've experienced in politics...

One can only imagine what it is like for people who have invested so much of their adult life to bring a child to Canada to give it the love and support that it needs. It is a difficult situation.

As we know, adoption in Canada is a provincial issue. Many provinces have their own policies and legislation, and it varies considerably. In almost every province there are private agencies that are licensed to assess applicants, to act as a go-between, between the birth parents and the adoptive parents.

It is difficult to know the data on waiting lists. It is hard to put a number on this issue. Provinces do not generally keep that. They will give a general ballpark of how long it takes to go through the adoption process. A report in Alberta indicated that the average wait is somewhere between six and thirty months, and in other provinces it is higher than that.

What support is available to adoptive parents now? My colleague from Essex indicated some of them. That is at the heart of the motion, what is available now? Some benefits are the same for birth or adoptive parents. Some of our social infrastructure recognizes the challenges of adoptive families. My colleague is asking that the human resources committee evaluate that, look at provincial jurisdictions, look at what services are available and look at what services are not available. Some provinces are going ahead. Some provinces have made some impact. In 2009 the Ontario Panel on Infertility and Adoption produced a report, and I will quote from that report. This is in Ontario:

Ontarians build their families in different ways. Many--including heterosexual couples, same-sex couples, and single people--use adoption and assisted reproduction services. But barriers like cost, lack of information, system weaknesses, location, work constraints and stigma, prevent many Ontarians from accessing these services and keep many children waiting to be adopted.

I would commend this report to members for their consideration. In the recommendations, it refers to some specific things that the province of Ontario recommends. A couple of those touch on the federal government, for the federal government to have a look to see how it could work with provinces to look at this situation.

It says in the report that one out of every six couples in Ontario have issues of infertility, and we can all speak to that. We all know people in our communities, in our families, who have trouble having children and look to the adoption process.

This is a big issue. It is in many ways a complex issue. It is an issue of importance to many Canadian families. It is an issue that touches on a whole level of jurisdictions, involves a lot of agencies and involves many people.

I can certainly see that the human resources committee has a lot of work ahead of it. We have our report on poverty study that we need to get finished. However, I support my colleague in his intent that we have a look at all the myriad of infrastructure that exists around supporting adoptive families to see if it is enough, to see if we can help and to see if we can continue to make Canada the best place on earth to raise all families.

[Support Measures for Adoptive Parents, October 30th, 2009]

Mr. Speaker, I offer my congratulations to my colleague from Essex for bringing this forward. It obviously comes from deep inside him and from his experience in life as both a child and a parent. I think this emotion is well worth looking at to see what we can do to help adoptive parents. I have a few comments on that, that I will make shortly.

He mentioned specifically at the end of his comments one measure that we might look at. Are there a couple of specific ideas that he thinks might come out of this study that he would provide to the committee? Would he give the human resources committee a heads up on one or two things that it might look at when it does its deliberations?

[Government Advertising, October 30th, 2009]

Mr. Speaker, I think the minister thinks that this a game. He thinks it is okay to abuse taxpayers' dollars and brush off questions of accountability with a smirk and a wave of the hand.

Who would have thought that when the Conservatives said they would invest in public transit, it meant plastering partisan propaganda on Toronto's GO trains?

Why does the Conservative Party believe it can do or say anything, and get away with it? When will it return the money it used to pay for its 2009 self-promotion tour?

[Government Advertising, October 30th, 2009]

Mr. Speaker, we know that the Conservative government is the most divisive and spiteful in our history. What we have witnessed over the past few months are television, radio and print ads that promote the Conservative Party of Canada, costing Canadian taxpayers over $60 million, and counting.

The Conservatives are deliberately blurring the line between the state and a political party. Their arrogant self-promotion offends Canadians, including bureaucrats, who have never seen this type of abuse.

When will the Conservatives stop this taxpayer-funded partisan campaign and stop abusing Canadian taxpayers for their own benefit?

[Points of Order, October 22nd, 2009]

Mr. Speaker, I rise on a point of order. Twice today in question period government members referred to what they call the 45-day work year, which is their derisive and misleading definition of a 360-hour national standard. They can call it what they want, but they know the cost of it is not the $4 billion they continually refer to.

This may seem like a point of debate but this is a point of clarity and of importance to Canadians. Canadians deserve better from their government than to have these misleading comments made continually in the House where government members are supposed to represent the national interest.

I hope government members might consider that and not do that in the future.

[National Philanthropy Day Act, October 20th, 2009]

Mr. Speaker, I admire Clara Hughes, who is not only a winter Olympian but a summer Olympian as well. The work she has done is fabulous.

I would be remiss not to mention Sidney Crosby from Dartmouth—Cole Harbour, who is one of the leaders in Canada not only as a hockey player but as a person who supports charities, who works with kids and makes this country a better place.

We have some fabulous athletes in this country. Not all athletes are great role models but when we talk about Clara Hughes and Sidney Crosby, we are very blessed in this country.

[National Philanthropy Day Act, October 20th, 2009]

Mr. Speaker, I always felt when I was in the not-for-profit sector as a volunteer that the taxation situation should be the same for not-for-profit organizations as it is for political parties.

I am not specifically familiar with my colleague's private member's bill. However, I always thought it made sense. Politicians make the tax laws and the laws are designed to assist people giving money to politics. I think that people should be encouraged to give money to politics. They should be given more credit for giving money to regulated not-for-profit charities.

Today we are debating the philanthropy bill. I would be quite happy to have that discussion with my colleague. I would ask him for his support on this bill, and then I will consider my support for his bill.

[National Philanthropy Day Act, October 20th, 2009]

Mr. Speaker, one of the things we constantly find in this country is that a lot of the money that is given does not necessarily come from people we might expect or from areas we might expect. We have very generous people who give money, like the John Risleys and the Ken Rowes and the Goldblooms. We are very fortunate that way.

However, I recall from the days when I was involved with the Heart and Stroke Foundation that the maritimers gave more money on a per capita basis than people in the rest of the country. People in Cape Breton, for example, and parts of rural Nova Scotia that do not seem to be doing particularly well, were very generous.

Canadians are generous people. I think Canadians want to help their fellow citizens. I think Canadians want a country that is strong. Canadians believe that we are a stronger country when we help the weak, that we are stronger when we protect the vulnerable, and they want to play their part in that.

This bill would be a recognition of that fact. It would allow people to give, knowing that the government supports their initiatives.

[National Philanthropy Day Act, October 20th, 2009]

moved that Bill S-217, An Act respecting a National Philanthropy Day, be read the second time and referred to a committee.

Mr. Speaker, I am very pleased to once again bring this bill forward to the House, a bill first introduced, debated and adopted by our colleagues in the other place.

Bill S-217 would officially recognize November 15 of each year as national philanthropy day. I want to thank the hon. senators who did the legwork on this piece of legislation, in particular Senators Grafstein and Mercer and others who have dedicated large parts of their lives to the betterment of others through philanthropic endeavours. Their work continues with this bill. I congratulate them on their life's work, for bringing this bill forward once again and particularly for the diligence they have shown over the last couple of Parliaments to get this through.

National philanthropy day in fact occurs already on November 15. Events are held across this country to recognize the critical importance of philanthropy, of giving in Canada. The bill before us today seeks to officially recognize these efforts by the Parliament of Canada.

I want to thank my colleague from Mississauga—Streetsville for seconding it. I know she has a long history of philanthropy and helping others.

Giving is a critical component to so many sectors, organizations, communities and Canadians. Today, giving is probably more important than ever. It builds upon the shared responsibility we have to help each other. It brings people together around a common cause. At a time when governments are reducing funding and support for the voluntary sector, privately donated money becomes critical to replace that shortfall.

In critical areas like health care, human rights, health promotion, the arts, literacy, recreation for our children, services for our seniors, churches, and so many others, the act of giving time and money is a central element of an organization's ability to serve its community.

Like most colleagues in the House, I have worked as a volunteer in the charitable sector and I have seen and felt the impact of those who give. In my own experience, I have been privileged to be associated with organizations like the CNIB, the Canadian Cancer Society, literacy groups, food banks, the Arthritis Society and many others.

My longest and strongest affiliation is with the Heart and Stroke Foundation, where I served as president in Nova Scotia, as well as serving on the national board of the Heart and Stroke Foundation of Canada. I learned that people give in many ways, large and small.

I was always amazed and humbled when every February thousands of Nova Scotians would hit the streets during Heart Month. They would go door to door collecting money in small amounts and some larger ones for the Heart and Stroke Foundation. Many of those same people hit the pavement a few months later in support of the Cancer Society or the Multiple Sclerosis Society or any number of other charities.

Philanthropy takes a number of forms. Every member of the House can think of those who give in their own communities, but in my own community of Dartmouth—Cole Harbour there are many examples of work that is being done. Some of it may seem small.

I think about those who work in food banks. I think about the volunteers who, every Wednesday, provide food for those in need in the north end of Dartmouth. I think about Feeding Others of Dartmouth, an organization with which my family has a long association, that provides support for those in Dartmouth who need food on a daily basis.

I think about literacy and people who give of their time so that others can learn to read and write. I can recall when the cuts to literacy were made in 2006, the number of people who called me and talked about how important this work was to them, people who gave of their time and helped them learn to read and write.

A man came into my office in tears to tell me about his circumstance. He had a job and he struggled. He had two or three children and struggled every day, but he did his job. He finally had an opportunity for promotion and had to turn it down because he knew he could not pass the literacy test. He did not want his employers to find out that he was in fact illiterate as it might affect his existing job. People help folks like that. People help learners.

There are breakfast for children programs and recreation programs. Like many people in the House, I have a son who is involved in minor hockey and soccer. I have a daughter who plays soccer and is involved in the Girl Guides. These things could not happen without people who give in the community. That does not even mention service clubs, the Kinsmen, the Kiwanis, the Rotary Club, the Lions Club and everybody else who gives so much.

On a small level people give, but on a large level people give as well. In my own community, there are people who support causes: the Risleys, the Rowes, the O'Regans, the Fountains, the Goldblooms, the Sobeys, the Joudreys, the Keatings, the McPhees, the Smithers, the Conrads, the MacDonalds, the Spatzs, the Flemings, the Edwards, and the Dennis family.

I want to mention one significant act of philanthropy in our community. Graham Dennis is the long-time publisher of the Halifax Chronicle Herald, one of Canada's few independently owned newspapers. He is the head of a very charitable family as well. A few years ago, I think it was in 2002, his son Will passed away at the age of 30 from an epileptic seizure. To honour his memory, the Will Dennis Fund was created.

The primary initiative of this is the establishment of the Will Dennis Chair in Pediatric Epilepsy at the IWK Children's Hospital. The fund reached a milestone in 2007, with the appointment of Dr. Michael Esser to the chair. Now it is a fully endowed chair. A lot of that money came from the Dennis family, not in a splashy way, not in any way to elevate themselves, but to bring to the community the resources they had in memory of somebody they loved so that others would not suffer in the same way.

That is the kind of philanthropy that exists in our communities. That is the kind of giving that makes Canada a better place. That is the kind of giving that we want to recognize with a national philanthropy day on November 15 from the Government of Canada.

Governments have come to rely on generous people. Governments need to do all they can to encourage this type of giving. There are many ways to support philanthropy. We can do so through the tax system, by leveraging money, and through recognition, like here today, by passing legislation to formally make November 15 of each year national philanthropy day. That would be a welcome acknowledgement for the many people in the philanthropic community who support this legislation, the organizations that support philanthropy and the hard-working people who go out and raise money these days, which is not easy. I mention organizations like AFP, the Association of Fundraising Professionals, Philanthropic Foundations Canada, the Voluntary Sector Forum, Imagine Canada, and the Canadian Association of Gift Planners.

Charities are respected by Canadians. Polls have consistently shown that Canadians trust charities. In many ways, they trust charities more than they trust governments. A recent opinion poll of nearly 4,000 people found that charities are highly trusted. Charity leaders rank only behind nurses and doctors in terms of trust from the population. A majority of Canadians say they have a lot of trust in charities. These are organizations that are made up of people to support other people. They do it at great personal expense, but they do it because it is important, whether it is giving of time or whether it is giving of money.

Each of us has unsung heroes in our communities and ridings, people who give of their time and money in the hope that their efforts will make a difference. They do make a difference; they make a very significant difference.

Bill S-217 requires no money from the government. It is entirely non-partisan. It does not require even any investment of government time. All it requires is the recognition of giving, of philanthropy, of the hard work that is done by fundraising professionals and volunteers. Ultimately, it recognizes the great efforts of those who give to improve the lives of others. It is a small ask of this place with a huge reward for our country: a better, more generous Canada.

[Arthritis Society, October 20th, 2009]

Mr. Speaker, for 20 years some of Nova Scotia's most prominent citizens have been roasted to raise money for the Arthritis Society. These fun evenings are much anticipated and have raised a lot of money to fight arthritis. The roastees have been an incredible range of community leaders all the way from Day to Zed. On October 28 some of them will show their best moves and their talent, and a little bit of showbiz at the Cunard Centre.

I have heard it said that politics is showbiz for ugly people. That cannot be true.

I know that my colleagues from Halifax West to Kings—Hants, and everybody in the House want to acknowledge these great Nova Scotians: Frank Cameron, Fred MacGillivray, Denis Ryan, Jerry Lawrence, Robbie Shaw, Steve Parker, Dale Godsoe, John Risley, Jim Moir, Charles Keating, Paul O'Regan, Sir Graham Day, the fabulous Goldblooms, Dr. John Savage, Jack Flemming, Mickey and Colin MacDonald, Dr. John Hamm, Robert Zed and Dr. Bill Stanish.

My father was honoured to be included in this distinguished group. I congratulate them all. I congratulate the organizers. I wish everyone at the Cunard Centre a great night watching the moves and fighting arthritis.