Criminal Code  Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to add my voice to the debate on Bill C-7, an act to amend the Criminal Code with respect to medical assistance in dying. I want to start by reminding all members that this is important legislation. We as parliamentarians have a court-imposed deadline of December 18 to pass this legislation.

Criminal Code  Madam Speaker, I offer the sympathies on behalf of everyone in the House with respect to the personal loss the member has had within his family. I would point out a couple of clarifications. In terms of the consultations that went into the preparation of the bill, 300,000 people did fill out a questionnaire and about 125 experts were consulted.

Criminal Code  Madam Speaker, by way of clarification, amendments were accepted at committee. One was by the NDP with respect to accessing expertise in rural and remote communities and one by the Green party in respect to ensuring consultation happens between the Minister of Health and the Minister of Disability Inclusion.

Criminal Code  Mr. Speaker, I just point out that what has happened since the previous legislation was passed is that the average age of people who access MAID is 75 years old. MAID is being accessed by 2% of the Canadian population, which is right in the middle of all jurisdictions around the world that also allow MAID.

Criminal Code  Mr. Speaker, I will offer a clarification and then pose a question. The clarification is that I do not think it is accurate to construe this as an offer to provide MAID. In track two a written request is made, then a 90-day assessment period takes place. During the course of that 90-day assessment, information about both palliative care and counselling needs to be provided, and it needs to be considered before MAID is actually delivered.

Criminal Code  Mr. Speaker, I have had the occasion to travel overseas with the member and I respect immensely his advocacy on behalf of autism, in particular, and on behalf of his son. I do not think some of the things that were outlined in his comments are mutually exclusive. We can have supports for palliative care such as the $6 billion we put into home care.

Criminal Code  Mr. Speaker, I want to thank the hon. member for Northumberland—Peterborough South for his past contributions at the justice committee. By way of clarification, I would offer that some of the safeguards have been improved in the legislation with respect to track two, in particular, for those whose death is not reasonablely foreseeable.

Criminal Code  Madam Speaker, I think it is unfortunate and inaccurate to conflate the idea of discrimination in this context. First, the charter of rights requires that persons with disabilities be able to make the exact same decisions about their body and their passing as persons with ability, which is what the Truchon decision references.

Criminal Code  Madam Speaker, as a point of clarification, there are four protections for conscience rights in this regime: the preamble, section 9 of the former Bill C-14, section 2 of the Charter and paragraph 132 of the Carter decision. In terms of persons with disabilities and respecting their autonomy, I refer the member opposite to the comments of Senator Petitclerc, former Conservative minister Steven Fletcher, and many others who have indicated that there is a heterogeneity of views among the disability community.

Criminal Code  Madam Speaker, I appreciated the speech given by the member for Esquimalt—Saanich—Sooke prior to question period and his contributions at the justice committee in the very sensitive and measured study of this bill. In respect of what he heard at committee and in respect of his interest in this legislation, I wonder if he could comment on the amendment that he suggested, which was eventually adopted by the committee, in respect of ensuring that when someone is on track two, as it is known, where one's death is not reasonably foreseeable, the expertise is available to do a robust and rigorous assessment of the conditions and one's eligibility for MAID.

Justice  Madam Speaker, our government is committed to ensuring that those who engage in gambling can do so in a safe and regulated way. The current laws prohibiting single-event sports betting allow organized crime to profit and create economic disparities for our communities. That is why we are proposing changes to the legislation that has been tabled to allow the provinces and territories to regulate this and for Canadian communities to benefit from the revenues.

Persons with Disabilities  Madam Speaker, the issue of sensitivity toward persons with disabilities is central for all parliamentarians in the House. We are crafting a piece of legislation that ensures the autonomy, dignity and competence of individuals who choose this path, while all the time ensuring that there are safeguards in place to protect those who are vulnerable.

Persons with Disabilities  Madam Speaker, I would point out for the member's edification, and for members of the House, that two amendments were accepted: one by the NDP and one by the Green Party. The second important piece to conceptualize here is that much has been made about the competence and autonomy of individuals choosing the path of MAID.

Justice  Madam Speaker, as I said earlier on in question period, this decision is going to rekindle a great deal of hurt and anger among those who are affected by this terrible crime, including the Muslim Canadian community of which I count myself a member, the victims, their families, their friends, people in Quebec and across the country.

Justice  Madam Speaker, we have brought in an open and transparent appointments process. In 2016, we made essential reforms, including the reform to the judicial advisory committee. This led to the appointment of more than 400 exceptional legal experts to the bench. The diversity of these appointments is also unprecedented.