Sheri Benson

[World Alzheimer's Day, September 21st, 2018]

Mr. Speaker, today is World Alzheimer's Day, a day where organizations around the world raise awareness for Alzheimer's and dementia.

In Saskatchewan, it is estimated that 20,000 residents will be diagnosed with a form of dementia by the year 2020. That is a health issue affecting more people than the population of our province's fifth largest city.

Today, I rise to salute the outstanding efforts of the Alzheimer Society of Saskatchewan. Not only are they on the front lines helping those in need, but they are leading the way in the search for a cure. Last year, the society was active in 302 communities across Saskatchewan. A day's work may involve helping families come to terms with a recent diagnosis, guiding people through what to expect as the disease progresses or connecting people to the services they need. For many, the society is a lifeline.

I invite all members of this House to join me in thanking the Alzheimer Society for their outstanding service to the people of Saskatchewan and across Canada.

[National Defence Act, September 21st, 2018]

Mr. Speaker, I want to congratulate the government on bringing this bill forward. As my colleague from Victoria mentioned, we will be supporting this bill and working very hard in committee so that it can become law.

I just want to follow up on the question from the member for Victoria to give the parliamentary secretary another opportunity to address the issue around military justice and self-harm.

What we know is that those who come forward seeking help within the military would be turned in for discipline, should they be found trying to commit suicide. What safeguards are the Liberals going to put forward to address the real needs of mental health supports in the military to ensure that service is delivered free of punishment and disciplinary actions?

[The Environment, September 20th, 2018]

Mr. Speaker, this summer I had the opportunity to see Saskatoon residents doing their part to live sustainably.

I joined Holly Ann Knott and Jim Spinney as they celebrated the certification of their passive house, the first home in the Canadian Prairies to meet these standards. They are not alone.

Mike Nemeth and his partner, Shannon Dyck, are moving into the newest sustainable housing complex, meeting passive house standards in my riding, Radiance Cohousing.

I also attended the launch of Canada's first 100% solar powered electric vehicle available for anyone to use through the Saskatoon CarShare Co-operative. The Saskatoon Environmental Society Solar Co-operative has installed the solar panels that will provide renewable energy to the Saskatoon grid powering the electric vehicles.

This Canadian first was possible because of great partners, like YWCA Saskatoon, Sun Country Highway, Saskatchewan Research Council, Saskatoon Light & Power, Affinity Credit Union and many more.

I ask all members of the House to join me in celebrating these incredible efforts toward a sustainable future.

[Questions Passed as Orders for Returns, September 17th, 2018]

With regard to mitigating the effects from the closure of the Saskatchewan Transportation Company in May 2017: (a) what meetings have taken place since May 2017, between the Minister of Transport, Parliamentary Secretary or departmental officials, including Ministerial Exempt Staff, and representatives from the provincial government, broken down by (i) dates, (ii) lists of attendees, (iii) locations, (iv) agendas; (b) what meetings have taken place, since May 2017, between the Minister of Transport, Parliamentary Secretary or departmental officials, including Ministerial Exempt Staff, and representatives from municipal governments, broken down by (i) dates, (ii) lists of attendees, (iii) locations, (iv) agendas; (c) what meetings have taken place, since May 2017, between the Minister of Innovation, Parliamentary Secretary or departmental officials, including Ministerial Exempt Staff, and representatives from the provincial government, broken down by (i) dates, (ii) lists of attendees, (iii) locations, (iv) agendas; (d) what meetings have taken place, since May 2017, between the Minister of Innovation, Parliamentary Secretary or departmental officials, including Ministerial Exempt Staff, and representatives from municipal governments, broken down by (i) dates, (ii) lists of attendees, (iii) locations, (iv) agendas; (e) what meetings have taken place, since May 2017, between other government officials, Ministers, Parliamentary Secretaries or departmental officials, including Ministerial Exempt Staff, and representatives from municipal governments and the Saskatchewan provincial government, broken down by (i) dates, (ii) lists of attendees, (iii) locations, (iv) agendas; (f) which transportation companies or providers have met with the Minister of Transport, Parliamentary Secretary, or departmental officials, including Ministerial Exempt Staff regarding the possible replacement of services formerly provided by the Saskatchewan Transportation Company, since May 2017, broken down by (i) dates, (ii) lists of attendees, (iii) locations, (iv) agendas; (g) which transportation companies or providers have met with the Minister of Innovation, Parliamentary Secretary, or departmental officials, including Ministerial Exempt Staff, regarding the possible replacement of services formerly provided by the Saskatchewan Transportation Company, since May 2017, broken down by (i) dates, (ii) lists of attendees, (iii) locations, (iv) agendas; (h) what meetings have taken place, since May 2017, between the Minister of Transport, Parliamentary Secretary or departmental officials, including Ministerial Exempt Staff, and Members of Parliament, broken down by (i) dates, (ii) lists of attendees, (iii) locations, (iv) agendas; (i) what meetings have taken place, since May 2017, between the Minister of Innovation, Parliamentary Secretary or departmental officials, including Ministerial Exempt Staff, and Members of Parliament, broken down by (i) dates, (ii) lists of attendees, (iii) locations, (iv) agendas; (j) if no meetings have taken place, what is the timeline for such meetings to occur for each of these groups and with each Minister, Parliamentary Secretary or departmental officials, including Ministerial Exempt Staff; (k) which provincial or municipal representatives have received correspondence from government officials like Ministers, Parliamentary Secretaries, or departmental officials, including Ministerial Exempt Staff, regarding the possible replacement of services formerly provided by the Saskatchewan Transportation Company since May 2017, broken down by (i) dates, (ii) senders, (iii) recipients, (iv) titles, (v) subjects, (vi) summaries, (vii) file numbers; (l) which transportation companies or providers have received correspondence from government officials like Ministers, Parliamentary Secretaries, or departmental officials, including Ministerial Exempt Staff regarding the possible replacement of services formerly provided by the Saskatchewan Transportation Company, since May 2017, broken down by (i) dates, (ii) senders, (iii) recipients, (iv) titles, (v) subjects, (vi) summaries, (vii) file numbers; (n) which Members of Parliament have received correspondence, since May 2017, from the Minister of Transport, Parliamentary Secretary, or departmental officials, including Ministerial Exempt Staff regarding the possible replacement of services formerly provided by the Saskatchewan Transportation Company, broken down by (i) dates, (ii) senders, (iii) recipients, (iv) titles, (v) subjects, (vi) summaries, (vii) file numbers; (o) which Members of Parliament have received correspondence, since May 2017, from the Minister of Innovation, Parliamentary Secretary, or departmental officials, including Ministerial Exempt Staff regarding the possible replacement of services formerly provided by the Saskatchewan Transportation Company, broken down by (i) dates, (ii) senders, (iii) recipients, (iv) titles, (v) subjects, (vi) summaries, (vii) file numbers?

[Housing, June 19th, 2018]

Mr. Speaker, I do not feel that it is for Canadians or the opposition to pat the government on the back for what I feel are half-measures when it comes to addressing the crisis of homelessness.

A government that is committed to a rights-based approach would not have a goal of a 50% reduction in chronic shelter users. It is my job to ask the government to match the action and investment with the urgency of the problem, which I do not feel it has done. The current goal of the national housing strategy falls well short and does not match the crisis we are facing.

All Canadians have a right to housing, not just a temporary shelter. A home should not be a reward but a fundamental human right. A right to housing is fundamental to the true realization of other human rights, like the security of a person. Canadians have a right to housing, and I would like our laws to express that.

[Housing, June 18th, 2018]

Mr. Speaker, earlier this year I asked the government to follow through on its promise of housing rights being human rights. Instead, the government has shown time and time again that it does not embrace the rights-based approach. This was clearly demonstrated when the national housing strategy underwhelmed us with its half-measures to addressing the crisis of homelessness in Canada.

In 2016, my colleague from North Island—Powell River presented this legislature with a bill that would have enshrined the right to housing in our bill of rights, “...the right [of an individual] to proper housing, at a reasonable cost and free of unreasonable barriers.”

This is what we asked for Canadians and this is what the government refused to promise its citizens.

How can the government promote its plan for a human rights-based approach to housing without declaring housing to be a human right? The national housing strategy discussion paper states that "there is no universal definition of what a human rights-based approach to housing means". This is government-speak for not wanting to do the hard work to build a consensus around a definition in Canadian human rights law. Consultation is only the first step. A government that came to power with the mantra of hope and hard work should not be shying away from that hard work, but instead leading the way.

Every year, there are 235,000 people experiencing some form of homelessness in Canada and almost three million Canadians spend more than 30% of their income on housing. In the face of these shocking numbers, the stated goal of the government to reduce chronic users of shelters by 50% is extremely disappointing and hardly the goal of a government that has any intention of enshrining a human rights approach.

In fact, many provinces and municipalities have more ambitious goals and so this goal for the national housing strategy is underwhelming and will leave far too many Canadians homeless.

Last month, Canada underwent its third cycle of the universal periodic review at the UN Human Rights Council, and member countries expressed concerns that a nation such as Canada, one with such an advanced level of development, has rates of poverty and homelessness that are far above expected totals.

One peer reviewer from Portugal recommended that the legislation implementing the national housing strategy fully recognize the right to housing and provide for effective remedies for violations of that right.

The government has until September to decide which recommendations it will accept and which it will reject. The world is watching and waiting to see how Canada will respond to these recommendations.

The recent report by the advisory committee on homelessness convened by the government also recommends a more ambitious goal for ending homelessness. The UN special rapporteur on the right to housing is also disappointed by the government's low targets pertaining to ending homelessness, as am I. It shows a lack of ambition and a lack of urgency when we only aim to reduce homelessness by 50% over 10 years. We can and must do so much better.

The 2018 budget stated: "housing in shelters doesn't just provide a safe place to sleep, it saves lives." This is true, but if we couple this statement with the national housing strategy goal of a 50% reduction in chronic shelter users, we see a government emphasis on sheltering those who are homeless, not on permanent housing and not on stepping away from prevention and addressing root causes.

A truly rights-based approach policy would focus on ending homelessness, not managing it, and not dealing with some people who are homeless, but all Canadians who are homeless. Canadians deserve the right to security, affordability, good health, and safety in the form of adequate housing. Will the government reconsider its opposition to enshrining the right to housing in legislation?

[United Ways of Saskatoon and Area and Regina, June 18th, 2018]

Mr. Speaker, last week, the United Ways of Saskatoon and Area and Regina launched the province-wide 211 phone, chat, and text line, connecting everyone in Saskatchewan to over 5,000 helping services. With a truly province-wide connection, everyone in the province can pick up the phone to connect with the help they are searching for when dealing with life's challenges. The 211 service connects people with professionals ready to help 24 hours a day, 365 days a year, in over 100 languages, including 17 indigenous languages.

Despite best intentions of governments and community, finding the service that helps is a daunting task. When individuals and families find services quickly and easily, they are better equipped to meet life's challenges, families and individuals feel connected, and our entire community prospers.

I ask all members of the House to join me in congratulating the United Ways of Saskatoon and Area and Regina on launching the 211 phone line, helping citizens of Saskatchewan access help when they need it.

[Impact Assessment Act, June 12th, 2018]

Madam Speaker, I do want to make the comment, to be clear, that by including UNDRIP in the preamble to this bill, it is included in the part of the bill that does not have anything binding.

The opportunity to include UNDRIP in the parts of the bill that would actually give it teeth and make it included were all voted down. My hon. colleague, the member for Edmonton Strathcona tried to get the government to align what it says in public with what would be in the bill, making sure that UNDRIP was respected.

I want to ask my hon. colleague why UNDRIP was only included in the non-binding part of the legislation, and not in the teeth of the legislation, which most people would think the government would have supported.

[Housing, June 12th, 2018]

Mr. Speaker, today, in Toronto. there is an inquest into the death of Grant Faulkner, who died homeless when his shelter caught on fire in January 2015.

For too many Canadians, a lack of housing is a matter of life or death. Despite yesterday's announcement, the national housing strategy does not invest money specifically for homeless Canadians.

We need permanent supportive housing, rent-geared-to-income housing, and a national housing benefit to help the most vulnerable. Will the government commit today to a national housing strategy that ensures housing for homeless Canadians?

[Business of Supply, June 11th, 2018]

Mr. Speaker, I want to state in this House I am supportive of my colleague from Windsor—Tecumseh's comments that emphasize the importance of using diplomacy and building relationships on the ground as a way to move forward and support people living within regimes and nations where their human rights are not being respected. I feel many Iranian Canadians trying to get permanent residency here in Canada are concerned that part of that delay is that there is not an embassy in Iran.

What is the proof that going a different route would have more impact on restoring human rights for people in Iran, that is, closing an embassy rather than opening an embassy and keeping diplomatic relations going?