Niki Ashton

[Canada Early Learning and Child Care Act, June 14th, 2023]

Madam Speaker, if the member had been here during the first two years of my twins' life, she would have seen them in the House as well, prior to Zoom.

For us, in the NDP, what is really important is universal access and that we make sure all families have access to affordable child care no matter where they live. We obviously need to have special recognition of the barriers facing low-income families and women who are facing economic hardship. Today's legislation is an important step in that direction.

We need to make sure there is adequate funding, which also involves making sure ECE workers, many of them also mothers who need child care, have a living wage, and we need to make sure we are making the necessary investments in the program.

[Canada Early Learning and Child Care Act, June 14th, 2023]

Madam Speaker, I want to acknowledge the minister's work on this critical piece of legislation. I know it has been very important for us to work with the minister and make sure the government lives up to the vision that, as the minister pointed out, so many advocates have fought for for years.

We are, absolutely, already seeing positive impacts when it comes to investment in child care. In fact, just a couple of months ago, my neighbour across the street, also the mother of twins, ran over to tell me that her family was one of the ones that were going to be able to get reduced child care fees as a result of our actions in Parliament. I was so proud that this was already making a difference here in Manitoba, in the north, where our child care needs are significant. We are known as being in a child care desert here, given the demands of our communities.

I also want to acknowledge that much work needs to be done when it comes to making sure there is adequate child care in indigenous communities, some of the youngest communities in the country, with a real lack of infrastructure. I am looking forward—

[Canada Early Learning and Child Care Act, June 14th, 2023]

Madam Speaker, I am honoured to speak in the House in support of a historic piece of legislation, Bill C-35.

I want to begin by acknowledging the hard work of my colleague, the member for Winnipeg Centre, who has worked tirelessly on this bill and who has worked alongside our team to push the Liberals to create a stronger version of this bill on behalf of children, families, Canadian women and all of us.

For me, child care hits close to home. As many of us know, and as my constituents certainly know, I am the proud mother of five-year-old twins. I, like many mothers in Canada, faced real challenges when it came to accessing child care after I had my kids.

I was on a waiting list for child care in Ottawa for over two years, and then, of course, as soon as COVID hit and, knowing that our child care needs had entirely shifted to my constituency here in Manitoba, I was again on a waiting list, and of course, like all families, I faced the insecurities and disruptions caused by the pandemic.

Many who may have tuned into our online sittings throughout that time would have seen one or even both of my children popping up on Zoom during working hours, because that is what it was like to work from home with kids at home without access to child care.

While I treasure the time with my kids, as many mothers know, juggling all of that without access to child care when we want it and when we need it can be a real nightmare.

The reality is that the lack of access to child care in Canada has absolutely held women back and held families back. This legislation is an important step in standing up for women in our country, for families and for a better future for all of our children.

As I begin this speech, I want to say that this victory would not have happened without the decades of activism, of work that has been done by women across our country.

I want to acknowledge the groundbreaking work of the National Action Committee on the Status of Women, with leaders like Judy Rebick. I want to acknowledge the many activists involved in the national action committee throughout the country, including people like my mother, Hariklia Dimitrakopoulou-Ashton, who has certainly shaped who I am and who was part of an organization that made it very clear that equality for women and justice for women means child care.

I also want to acknowledge the many women in the labour movement who have tirelessly fought for decades for access to universal, affordable not-for-profit child care. They include leaders like Barb Byers, Vicky Smallman and Bea Bruske, the current CLC president, and her team.

I want to acknowledge women across the country who have made it their aim to speak and fight for child care. In B.C., they are people like Sharon Gregson. Many women here in Manitoba have been part of this fight. Martha Friendly and many more have fought for child care for decades. They and many others are the reason we are standing here today.

I also want to acknowledge a former colleague who is in the news a fair bit right now and who I think many of us hope will soon be the mayor of Toronto, former New Democrat MP Olivia Chow, who, when she was in Parliament, fought tirelessly for child care. She was the first to propose an early learning and child care program for Canadians. Her leadership created the framework for a universal, high-quality, affordable and not-for-profit national child care program.

New Democrats have long called for universal early learning and child care in this country, and it has been a long road to get the other parties on board. I am thinking of long negotiations just to include this in the supply and confidence agreement with the Liberals. Our demands that this be implemented by the end of the year are the reason we are here, and I am proud that due to NDP pressures, we will see this bill adopted before the end of 2023.

Let us look at the figures. Roughly half of Canadian children under six years old do not have access to either licensed or even unlicensed child care. This impacts primarily women, delaying their capacity to return to work at a time of their choosing. Of the women in families that do not have access to child care, 42% end up postponing their return to work.

This is unacceptable. Our current piecemeal system leaves far too many women without the choice to decide for themselves, ourselves, when we can go back to work. Those lost years mean less income for women and fewer opportunities for promotions and furthering careers. It means being punished for starting families.

Every day that we do not have an early learning and child care program in Canada is a day when Canada shows the extent to which it devalues women and how little it wants us to succeed. Let us be clear. The provinces know this. Everyone in the House knows this. We have had commission after commission and report after report. Over half a century ago, the Royal Commission on the Status of Women identified publicly funded universal child care as one of 167 recommendations. For over 30 years, we have heard Liberal promises around child care. It was just around the corner, red book after red book and often heard about during the election, only to have the Liberals complain how hard it was to enact when they got into government.

Far too many women are waiting for far too many men, and some women, to figure out how to treat us with basic dignity and respect. Whether it is our earning power's resembling that of our male counterparts, our capacity to live safely and without fear of violence, equitable abortion access in communities in rural and northern parts of our country, or access to child care, women in Canada are tired of having to prove their basic humanity.

This bill is important, and no one should diminish that. Every parent across Canada deserves access to affordable, accessible, high-quality child care. This bill would enshrine this vision in law and would commit the federal government to long-term funding for provinces and indigenous communities. This bill sets out the vision for a national early learning and child care system and the principles guiding federal investment in that system.

Speaking of funding, we need to be clear. There needs to be long-term, sustainable core funding directed at not-for-profit, accessible and universal child care programs. We need to make sure that ECE workers, who are incredible individuals and amongst the most patient people I know, make a living wage and beyond for the work they do. We need to make sure there is investment in infrastructure. I am thinking of indigenous communities here in our region, with some of the youngest populations in our country, that do not have access to adequate day care spaces. We need to make sure the federal government works with first nations, with Inuit communities and with indigenous communities across the country to make sure adequate child care centres are being built.

It is important to acknowledge that this bill would establish a national advisory council on early learning and child care and set out reporting requirements on the progress being made regarding national child care and the federal investments being made in the system.

Finally, it is meant to contribute toward the realization of the right to child care services, which is recognized in the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child and the implementation of the UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples. This bill acknowledges Canada's international obligations under the UN Convention of the Rights of Persons with Disabilities and to the elimination of all forms of discrimination against women, as well as that a national child care system must respect the rights of indigenous peoples as affirmed by the Constitution Act of 1982.

Today's work in Parliament and the passing of Bill C-35 is nothing short of historic, but we need to make sure that subsequent governments live up to their obligations in this bill and ensure that there is adequate funding to invest in our most prized resource: our children and our future.

I end by thanking those who have come before us: the feminists, the women, the many people who fought for this day to be a reality and who will continue to fight to make sure that children, women, all of us, get the chance and the support that we all deserve.

[Strengthening the Port System and Railway Safety in Canada Act, June 8th, 2023]

Madam Speaker, I would need a whole other speech to talk about what the Port of Churchill needs to survive and thrive.

I am proud to have been an advocate in support of Churchill getting rid of the American billionaire railway company that took over the rail line when the Liberals privatized it and ran it into the ground. Churchill paid the price. The communities on the Bay line paid the price. Thankfully, we were able to get them out of there.

We now have a very innovative and unique ownership model for the port. However, the reality is that we need sustained federal investment to make sure that Churchill survives and thrives. It is a gem when it comes to Canada. We talk about being a proud northern Arctic nation, and Churchill has the only deepwater Arctic seaport. We need to see sustained investment from the Liberal government and future federal governments.

[Strengthening the Port System and Railway Safety in Canada Act, June 8th, 2023]

Madam Speaker, I appreciate the member raising the derailment that took place in Winnipeg not long ago. It was obviously big news here in our province, and it speaks to the domino effect of these kinds of incidents.

Obviously we are very thankful and fortunate that what was being transported was not dangerous goods and that there were adequate services to respond to the situation. Nonetheless, people were impacted negatively as a result. It is a clear reminder of the work we need to do to make sure that the legislation in front of us is made stronger than what it is at this time.

I will acknowledge that while a derailment in Winnipeg is very serious and big news, the reality is that derailments happen all the time and have been happening much more frequently, particularly in rural and northern Canada. The results have been much worse. The sense of urgency that needs to follow our work here is something we cannot ignore—

[Strengthening the Port System and Railway Safety in Canada Act, June 8th, 2023]

Madam Speaker, I will be splitting my time with my colleague, the member for Timmins—James Bay.

I rise in the House to share the NDP's support at this time for this bill at second reading, with the clear understanding that there are some major shortcomings with Bill C-33 and that there have to be substantive amendments made going forward.

One of the key concerns that we have had is that the Liberal government's approach to Canada's supply chain issues is heavily driven by commercial interests, the commercial interests of big corporations that dominate the marine and rail transportation sectors. This, of course, has been the history of Canada in many ways, particularly when it comes to our railways.

We have seen the way in which profit has been put ahead of the lives of workers, of people and of communities, time and time again. Canada has a dark history when it comes to the development of the railways: the occupation of indigenous lands; the forcible removal of indigenous communities; the exploitation, early on, of Chinese workers and the many workers who lost their lives in very dangerous conditions to build the railways; the ongoing exploitation of workers over decades; and the bitter labour disputes, where workers working on the railways were doing nothing more than fighting for health and safety, safe conditions and the ability to keep our country moving.

We know that in Canada, over the past 20 years, 60 railway workers have lost their lives on the job. Due to archaic rules and regulations, and a lack of clarity on jurisdiction, there has been no criminal investigation into their deaths. Their deaths were investigated by private, corporate police and corporate risk management bodies. Justice has never been served.

I want to reflect on a few of those tragedies that have touched many of us through this work, and me personally. First of all, as other colleagues have said, is the Lac-Mégantic rail disaster that occurred on July 6, 2013, where 47 people died. It was the deadliest rail accident since Canada's Confederation in 1867, a rail disaster that was entirely preventable but rooted in the push to move product, and in that case crude oil, in very dangerous conditions. Forty-seven people died. A community has been forever changed as well as our country in many ways.

Here in northern Manitoba, Kevin Anderson, who was 38 years old, died after he and a co-worker were trapped for several hours following a train derailment in September 2018, just an hour away from my hometown of Thompson.

Kevin Anderson's family, from The Pas, Manitoba, has, for years now, fought for justice for their son. They fought for an inquest, an inquest that finally began some months ago. Unfortunately, just a few weeks into its beginning, it was already ruled that the scope of the proceedings had to change, and there would be no discussion of the preventability of this train conductor's death, of Kevin's death, as part of this inquest.

One of the most impactful cases that I have worked on as a member of Parliament was working with the families of Andrew Dockrell, Dylan Paradis and Daniel Waldenberger-Bulmer, three workers who were killed in the train derailment by Field, B.C., in 2019. These three workers worked for CP Rail, and their deaths, the tragedy and the injustice dealt to them and their families was documented in The Fifth Estate's work, “Runaway Train: Investigating a CP Rail Crash”.

In their case, the CP private police investigated and, not surprisingly, found that the company was not at fault. Fortunately, as a result of their steadfast advocacy, these families were able to get an investigation into their loved ones' deaths. We all hope that they will receive justice.

The reality is that as members of Parliament, we have the responsibility to stand up for the well-being of Canadians. We have the responsibility to stand up for the well-being of Canadian workers. In this case, we have seen the Liberal government and previous Conservative governments, when it comes to railway safety and regulating the railways, use kid gloves, if at all, and have always done it ensuring their profitability.

Bill C-33 was an opportunity to change that. The reality is that while there is some good in it, there is much more that needs to be done. There are significant shortcomings in this legislation. While the act would create, for example, indigenous engagement committees for port authorities, there is no mention of creating these committees or otherwise engaging indigenous communities when it comes to rail transport.

Another shortcoming is about the standing committee on transport's report on rail safety. It recommended the removal of the jurisdiction of private railway police in investigations involving their companies. It is our view, as the NDP, that private railway police should be dissolved entirely due to the lack of public accountability. This bill not only does not take up the recommendations made by committee, but in fact would strengthen the authority of private railway police. Proposed section 26.4 of the bill explicitly prohibits unruly behaviour at stations or on board railway equipment, which would be handled by these private corporate police services.

We have also been clear that the bill lacks legislative guidance on the required content of emergency response assistance plans for emergencies involving dangerous goods. Current emergency response assistance plans rely on municipal fire departments and have no requirement for maximum response times. This was an issue that came up in the Ponton tragedy that killed Kevin Anderson.

The standing committee on transport recommended, in its report on railway safety, that “Transport Canada mandate maximum response times as part of rail companies' Emergency Response Assistance Plans for the transportation of dangerous goods” and that “Transport Canada work to finalize timely approval to emergency response assistance plans for the transportation of dangerous goods.” These recommendations are not reflected in Bill C-33.

Another shortcoming is the lack of public regional risk assessments associated with increases in rail transport of dangerous goods, a key issue in the Lac-Mégantic disaster. The standing committee on transport recommended, in its railway safety report, that “Transport Canada undertake public regional risk assessments to assess the impact of increased rail activity on communities, First Nations and the environment in regions that have seen significant increase in the transportation of dangerous goods.” The amendments to the Transportation of Dangerous Goods Act do not act on this recommendation.

Another shortcoming is about the safety of workers. This has not been properly accounted for in this bill. In fact, the safety of workers is not explicitly mentioned at all. The national supply chain task force's 2022 report included six recommendations to address the worker shortage in our supply chains. Not a single recommendation was implemented. Also, the standing committee on transport's rail safety report included four recommendations to address fatigue management for rail workers. None of these have been implemented.

In conclusion, Bill C-33 ought to be an opportunity to change our Railway Safety Act and our port authorities act in order to make sure these important sectors of our economy and these workplaces respect workers and make a difference in a positive sense for communities. Unfortunately, when it comes to the railway industry that has not been the case.

Tonight, as we discuss this bill, I think of the families that are still grieving for those they lost on the job working the railways. I am thankful for their advocacy and their strength in pushing for justice and pushing all of us to do better. I hope the Liberal government will work with the NDP and other parties to make the necessary changes to Bill C-33 to ensure it is the strongest possible legislation and to make a difference for Canadian workers and Canadian communities going forward.

[Strengthening the Port System and Railway Safety in Canada Act, June 8th, 2023]

Madam Speaker, I first want to begin by asking for unanimous consent to split my time.

[Questions Passed as Orders for Returns, May 31st, 2023]

With regard to funding of flood mitigation activities: (a) in Northern Manitoba, what is the current amount of money dedicated to flood mitigation efforts by the federal government; (b) in Northern Manitoba, how much money was dedicated to preventative flooding measures, since September 1, 2021; (c) in Northern Manitoba, how much money was dispensed since September 2021; (d) in Northern Manitoba, what companies or organizations are tasked with managing the implementation of flood lines; (e) what are the expected areas to be flooded if 100 mm and 150 mm of rain were to fall around the Northern Red River area; (f) how much money is currently dedicated to Northern Indigenous Communities and First Nations for flood preventions across Canada; (g) how much money is dedicated to reactive versus preventive funds in (i) all of Canada, broken down by province, (ii) Northern Manitoba; and (h) broken down by year, how many people were displaced or have permanently moved away due to flooding in Northern Manitoba in the past five years?

[Questions Passed as Orders for Returns, May 31st, 2023]

With regard to government contracts with nursing agencies to serve rural and remote Indigenous communities, broken down by fiscal year, since 2011-12: (a) what is the total number of contracts signed; (b) what are the details of all contracts signed, including the (i) nursing agency contracted, (ii) value of the contract, (iii) number of nurses provided, (iv) duration of the contract; and (c) what is the total amount of extra costs incurred as a result of relying on nursing agencies instead of employing nurses directly?

[Questions Passed as Orders for Returns, May 31st, 2023]

With regard to government settlements on class action suits involving First Nations, since 2015: (a) how many have been administered or monitored (i) by private firms like Deloitte, (ii) through the federal public service; (b) how is the decision made on whether a settlement is administered by the federal public service or a private firm; (c) what is the process for an individual to file and seek resolution to a complaint that a recipient did not receive the appropriate amount from a settlement; (d) how many complaints have been made relating to a recipient of a class action lawsuit not receiving the appropriate amount, broken down by year; (e) how many of the complaints in (d) have resulted in a change in the amount the recipient received; (f) what is the total dollar amount of the changes in amounts received in (e); (g) what is the dollar amount of these settlements, broken down by year and organization responsible for administering the settlement; and (h) what is the dollar value paid to each firm in (a)(i) for the purpose of administering or monitoring each settlement?