Committee
Consult the user guide
For assistance, please contact us
Consult the user guide
For assistance, please contact us
Add search criteria
Results: 1 - 8 of 8
View Randy Boissonnault Profile
Lib. (AB)
Absolutely.
It's like when I speak with veterans and some of the older vets say that the only day they talk about their experiences is Remembrance Day. They stay silent on it for the rest of the year. Remembrance Day is their safe-space day. It's a similar concept.
I think there's a way to respect the TRC and have a day where we pause to remember, and also have another commemorative day when we do other activities. I think there's certainly the possibility of that.
You mentioned a monument for truth and reconciliation.
How would you see that incorporated into the day, either of you, Ry or Ms. Brown?
Ry Moran
View Ry Moran Profile
Ry Moran
2018-11-08 11:52
Briefly on that one, there's a call to action for a national monument here in Ottawa and one in every provincial capital, and then for the national Historic Sites and Monuments Board to deal with the actual sites of the residential schools.
I can see something happening in all of those places, plus additional ones. I can certainly see there being something very powerful happening here at the national monument, wherein national leaders would gather together to reflect on this terrible national crime.
We have to remember, going back in time, that there was a very scathing report issued in 1921, which referred to this as being “a national crime”. That's the name of John Milloy's book. He was the main researcher, who Terri talked about, on the RCAP file.
I can see there being a very solemn day wherein, as Terri was saying earlier, tobacco is put down, wreaths are put down; there is that moment of silence, that honouring and commemoration. We know how to honour people who have fallen in terrible circumstances. We just have to recognize in some ways, when we take a step back and think about this in terms of human rights, that the children who fell in these residential schools were largely non-combatants. They didn't deserve to have their lives shortened in such a terrible way.
Cindy Blackstock
View Cindy Blackstock Profile
Cindy Blackstock
2017-10-25 16:55
First of all, I would like to begin by recognizing that we're on unceded Algonquin territory and thanking you for the opportunity.
Children may not always listen to their elders, the saying goes, but they never fail to imitate them, so the question is, what kind of example are we setting, domestically and internationally, for the children of this generation in terms of the way that we treat one another and the way that we address and acknowledge discrimination, both at an individual level and at a structural level?
Here it requires a courageous conversation, because sometimes it's we, the good guys, who are doing the harm. In this case, it is the Canadian government that continues to racially discriminate against first nations children. That has to be acknowledged, not only because it relates to the Truth and Reconciliation Commission's top call to action about equity and child welfare to make sure that we raise this generation of children safely in their families, but also because it's simply the right thing to do.
What have we learned from history? That is the other piece. We apologized for residential schools, and then we apologized for the sixties scoop, and now Canada is out of compliance with four legal orders of the Canadian Human Rights Tribunal to end racial discrimination with children. What have we actually learned from residential schools? What have we learned from the past? How do we prepare this generation of children to learn from those past actions of racial discrimination, affecting indigenous peoples and others, in ways that prepare them to address injustices, both in a contemporary format and going forward into the future?
Today we saw in census figures that we're not holding up our promise to the residential school survivors in terms of the Truth and Reconciliation Commission's call to action number one. Over 40% of all children under four in child welfare care today are first nations children. Keep in mind that when children were removed for residential schools, they were removed at the tender age of five, and we saw the cataclysm that created. These are preschoolers.
Chairperson, as a physician, you know that the first 2,000 days of life lay down the fundamental building blocks of life. It's also a time, important to this committee's mandate, when children learn languages, particularly the indigenous languages, which are so at risk in this country in many cases. That's why Canada's compliance with the Canadian Human Rights Tribunal orders is so essential. It's essential because it's about giving a generation of first nations children a chance to grow up equitably and fairly in this country, but it's also about preparing a generation of non-indigenous children so that they never have to say they're sorry again.
A contemporary tragedy is unfolding in front of us all. It's not behind us. It's not in the residential schools or the sixties scoop. There are more first nations kids in care today than at any time in history. We have an opportunity to do something about it by providing equitable and culturally based child welfare services to first nations communities as the tribunal required and by ensuring the full and proper implementation of Jordan's principle so that first nations children can access all the public services they need, when they need them, and without additional red tape related to their first nations status. The third thing that can be done is something I call the Spirit Bear plan, which is for members of Parliament to ask the parliamentary budget officer to cost out the aggregate value of all the inequitable services that first nations children face.
Keep in mind that first nations children are not just receiving inequitable child welfare; they're also receiving inequitable education and inequitable early childhood. Some of them can't get clean water, and there are inadequate sanitation systems. As a country, we need to see what that big figure looks like, and then launch something akin to the Marshall Plan after the Second World War to eradicate those inequalities in ways that take full consideration of children's development and children's best interest. If we can rebuild Europe in 10 years, we can certainly correct a fundamental racial injustice that's occurring in this country in far less time than that.
For those who say it's too expensive or too complicated, I ask you this: if we are so broke as a nation that the only way we can fund things like arenas or subway systems is through racial discrimination against children, then what are the children losing to? What does this country really stand for?
I am one taxpayer who would be very happy to put off some of these projects that the government spends on, as much as I would like them, if it means a child will have a proper opportunity to grow up healthy and proud in this country for the first time in their culture's history. Start off your 151 with a positive legacy.
I am going to move on to something else about learning from history, which is less well known in our work. We are honoured to collaborate with Beechwood Cemetery, which is Canada's national cemetery; KAIROS; Project of Heart; Truth and Reconciliation commissioners Marie Wilson and Murray Sinclair; historian John Milloy; and Ellen Gabriel.
We recognize that in Canada's national cemetery are some of the leading characters in the residential school story.
Peter Henderson Bryce was the doctor who blew the whistle in 1907 on the preventable causes of death of children. He found that kids were dying at a rate of 25% a year from preventable causes, and he knew that with an additional $10,000 to $15,000 from the Canadian government, many of those children's lives could be saved. He was a chief medical officer in Canada. His findings were published in papers. He is buried there.
Duncan Campbell Scott, the leading bureaucrat on the residential schools file for 52 years, the man who refused to implement Dr. Bryce's reforms, is also buried there.
Nicholas Flood Davin was the person who wrote the Davin report, which was requisitioned by John A. Macdonald and led to the founding of industrial schools here in Canada.
We've created historical plaques that accurately tell the stories of these people. Duncan Campbell Scott, for example, is recognized as being a confederate poet, but he is also recognized as being a key actor in what the Truth and Reconciliation Commission found to be cultural genocide. His historical plaque includes both passages: confederate poet and cultural genocide. For Dr. Bryce, the full story of his career is told as well, and it's the same with Nicholas Flood Davin.
I think this is something very essential: teaching, at a time when people are talking about taking down monuments. I actually don't agree with taking down monuments. I agree with telling the full and proper truth, and this is something that I'd like to see the National Capital Commission embrace with a lot more vigour. For example, just a couple of years ago there was an exhibit on Laurier and Macdonald, and it talked about the building of the railway and the first francophone prime minister. It said nothing about their respective roles in residential schools. John A. Macdonald was an enthusiastic endorser of them, and hired Duncan Campbell Scott; Laurier was prime minister at the time when Dr. Bryce's reforms hit the newspaper, and he did not press for those reforms to be implemented and those kids' lives to be saved.
If we are to learn from the past, we have to accurately tell the history of the country. We have to train a generation of children to learn from our collective history, and not just the good and shiny parts. We have collaborated with Project of Heart. We've taken all the historical research that we've done for those plaques and converted it into school curriculum so that children are learning about these historical figures all over Canada as part of the Truth and Reconciliation Commission work.
In addition to that, to promote the Truth and Reconciliation calls to action, we have developed free activities that all children and families can do, which are peaceful, respectful, and evidence-based, and which make a meaningful difference.
We not only want to address the contemporary injustices, but we urge you to recommend, in this committee, that Canada immediately comply fully with the Canadian Human Rights Tribunal's orders.
We recommend that you work with the National Capital Commission, and we hope that they would be inspired by our reconciling history project to create historical plaques here in Ottawa that recognize the true telling of history.
We ask you to endorse the Spirit Bear plan to end the inequalities across all areas, and of course to fund and support indigenous languages with the same vigour and enthusiasm with which you do French and English in this country. To me, it is a travesty that indigenous languages are not recognized as the official languages of this country, when the name of the country itself comes from a first nations word. If we truly want to live up to being a village, which is what “kanata” actually means, we need to respect and honour the peoples who were the original founders of this nation.
With that, I thank you.
John FitzGerald
View John FitzGerald Profile
John FitzGerald
2017-02-23 15:47
Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.
Indeed, I am wearing a forget-me-not. Perhaps I can speak about that after my comments, if one of your members of Parliament would wish to ask me a question.
Thank you for your kind invitation to speak.
First I would like to make a brief comment about the bill in general; then I would like to speak about the language of the bill for a moment, and third, I would like to speak about some of the general understandings that I and my fellow Canadians here in Newfoundland and Labrador share as a society about the importance of honouring and remembering the sacrifices that are made for our country
First I would say that of course I agree very strongly with and support the idea of standardizing and in fact mandating across Canada the observance of Remembrance Day. It makes, I believe, a great deal of sense. It recognizes and honours the sacrifice, the commitment, and the history of those who have sacrificed for us, and it would indeed be a wonderful legacy to have done this in the year of Canada's 150th birthday.
Second, as a historian who has generally read in the field of war history—though my particular specialties are Newfoundland and Labrador history, constitutional history, the history of the 19th and 20th centuries of Canada—particularly as a Canadian and a private citizen who has visited Vimy Ridge and Beaumont-Hamel, I wish to make one brief observation about the text of the bill here. It's in clause 1, which replaces section 3 of the Holidays Act. It's the phrase, and I quote, “triumphantly concluded by an armistice”. This strikes me in a slightly odd way, and perhaps even in almost a discomforting or maybe even a jingoistic way. Kindly let me explain.
As you will know, Canada's sacrifices, and the sacrifices in my own province of Newfoundland and Labrador, which at the time was a British colony, were very heavy in World War I. Among other engagements, Canada obviously endured the terrible, horrible, cataclysmic, and, as the historians have argued, the nation-forging experience—the crucifixion—if you will, known as Vimy Ridge in April 1917, with 10,600 casualties, among them 3,500 fatalities.
As a fellow dominion of the British Empire at the time, Newfoundland's—Newfoundland and Labrador today—equivalent to Vimy was Beaumont-Hamel, in the Battle of the Somme. Our day occurred on July 1, 1916, when 801 went over the top of those trenches, and the next morning 68 answered the roll call.
That war—the sacrifice, the loss of life, and, in fact, the cost of that war—changed the very nature of life in Newfoundland and Labrador. As much as we might want to think of it today as being triumphant, blood sacrifices of this nature endured by Canada, and Newfoundland and Labrador, are hardly or very rarely ever triumphant.
The Great War, in fact, as we know, was a vicious, brutal, mechanized slaughter of a war, the likes of which had never been seen before in human history.
From my reading of that, I'm cautious about using the word “triumphant”. Yes, Canada was on the winning side, thank God, but at what price? We had to engage in a slaughter, and it was a brutal war. That whole concept of war and loss is very difficult to describe as a triumph.
My mind went back to when, in fact, I walked across the Douai Plain at Vimy. When we, as Canadians, visit there and we look at that profound monument—at least, the several times I did that—my reaction wasn't one of triumphantly concluding an armistice. Rather, personally, very privately, and frankly, I would have to say I had to do all that I could to avoid bursting into tears because of the emotion of that site and the profound, profound sacrifice by our fellow Canadians. At Beaumont-Hamel I was in tears because I found my great-grandmother's brother's name listed on the plaque in front of the caribou memorial as among those who were lost in battle with no known grave.
I believe that Vimy and Beaumont-Hamel are sacred places, if you will, almost holy places for Canadians, just like—and you'll be very familiar with this—the Memorial Chamber in our wonderful Peace Tower where the Books of Remembrance are kept. As Canadians raised in Newfoundland and Labrador, where our experience in World War I and World War II had such a profound influence on our identity and where so many of our citizens know those sacrifices so well from their family experiences, we even find it hard to say we celebrate. “Celebrate” is the wrong word for Remembrance Day; rather, we observe it, and perhaps I will say more on that shortly.
I would just speak for a moment, and perhaps this might be a little bit useful to you, on the mechanics of Bill C-311. I noted from reading the Hansard debates on this bill in the House of Commons that it was recognized by MPs in the debate that the provinces of Canada indeed do have the competence to declare Remembrance Day a public holiday, a legal holiday. Some have already done this, as you've noted.
In this province, Newfoundland and Labrador, that was formally accomplished in the Labour Standards Act of the Revised Statutes of Newfoundland. It was amended in 2001 to formally add Remembrance Day to that list. The mechanism for doing that is the act, of course, but it also enables the Lieutenant Governor in Council to proclaim days as holidays.
It's worth noting that in this province we actually have two separate statutory days or holidays, if you will, on which our war sacrifices are commemorated. They are, of course, the armistice anniversary day on November 11, as Remembrance Day, and the anniversary of Beaumont-Hamel on July 1—at least in the forenoon—which we celebrate as Memorial Day. Most people in my province are very happy to be celebrating Canada Day, but of course, we also have that dual thread of being quite aware of our history in the first war.
This brings me to my final formal observation, that of how, and I guess why, I'm predisposed to believe the intent of Bill C-311 is laudable.
As I say, I've grown up in a province, in a country, and in a community where the warp and weft of the fabric of our society was, in fact, our wartime experiences.
I was a student at Memorial University of Newfoundland, a memorial built in memory of our great war dead in World War I. While I was there as a graduate student, I read primary source documents, letters of people talking about the impact that Beaumont-Hamel had on their families. As a student, I walked through the downtown of St. John's with my late father, who was born in St. John's in 1923. He pointed out to me, when I was a young child, our national war memorial on Water Street, commemorating the people who had died in the Great War—the First World War—and in fact the Second World War and other conflicts. Even Afghanistan is there now.
That memorial—just to digress for a moment—was completed by Thomas Nangle. He was a padre to the Royal Newfoundland Regiment, and it was unveiled in 1924. That memorial, Mr. Chairman, was the first war memorial we can find that was completed in what is now Canada, and in fact in the British Empire. It was inspired directly by the poem In Flanders Fields, by Nangle's friend Colonel McCrae.
You'll see, if you visit St. John's, that there's a statue of a lady holding high the torch. Of course, this is a direct reference to the line in the poem:
The torch; be yours to hold it high.If ye break faith with us who die—
View Pierre Nantel Profile
Ind. (QC)
Great.
First, thank you for paying so much attention to Remembrance Day. Actually, I don't think we can talk about it enough.
Last year, I had the opportunity to visit the Beaumont-Hamel site. Now I can tell you that I don't see July 1 the same way anymore. I observe the mourning from morning until noon, ideally by wearing forget-me-nots. It is too easy to forget events like this, especially when there is little video archive.
In this regard, it was probably a little more difficult to document the First World War than the Second. Any action that will allow us to realize the chance we have, as a society, and the sacrifices that have been made for us to live here is valid. It is true that the gist of your idea has been proposed many times.
We always expect the Legion to agree, and that proposals like these will be received unanimously, much like chicken soup. Yet, how do you explain that we have been circling this for almost 10 years? Do you think that it can be explained by the disagreement on how to honour our veterans, and the split between veterans, and between the Legion and the associations?
What do you think? Honestly, I think that should naturally be a consensus and that we should have taken these steps ages ago.
View Erin O'Toole Profile
CPC (ON)
View Erin O'Toole Profile
2016-03-22 12:41
Yes, I'm always concerned when I read reports on it. It's important to not hide these statistics or anything like that, but sometimes the same reports then don't detail treatment options, such as the Veterans Transition Network and some programs you run. The reports provide just the sad end of someone, not the treatments that we should have been promoting.
I may share my time with Ms. Gallant. In my next few minutes, I'd like to discuss one thing I struggled with when I was minister. That was the concept that some families, first responders or military, would like to see a monument to people who served but who died via suicide. I struggled with that personally. To some families who want to know their member is remembered, they see this as a way to do that. But my fear, and I told them this, was that this could lead to more families going through the turmoil they were facing, because a monument like that could be something that pushes someone who's struggling over the end, thinking if they take this route, they'll be remembered through this monument.
Could you comment on that?
Donna Ferguson
View Donna Ferguson Profile
Donna Ferguson
2016-03-22 12:42
You know, I guess I'd be torn as well. I think I can see that side of it, where people might think they would be revered, almost, if this is the route they would go. On the other hand, I've actually had first responders say to me that just seeing that somebody goes through suicide, even if they were kind of put on a pedestal, actually reminded them that there was a reason for them to live, and that was not the way they wanted to go.
I think people have different perspectives on how that would look for them. I do think we have to be very careful about how we do promote that, so we don't give people ideas that this is the right way to go and that this is what will happen if you do complete your suicide.
I'm torn on that as well, because you do also want people to be remembered.
Elizabeth Stuart
View Elizabeth Stuart Profile
Elizabeth Stuart
2016-03-08 12:16
Good afternoon, Mr. Chair, vice-chairs, and committee members. It's a pleasure to be here with you and I look forward to discussing the Veterans Affairs 2015-16 supplementary estimates (C) submission.
My name is Elizabeth Stuart. I was recently appointed assistant deputy minister of human resources and corporate services branch for Veterans Affairs Canada. I'm here today with Maureen Sinnott, who is the director general of finance division and acting chief finance officer in Charlottetown, P.E.I.
Honourable members, as you know, the department is responsible for providing benefits and programs to veterans, Canadian Armed Forces personnel, and their families in recognition of their service to Canada, and for ensuring that their achievements and sacrifices are honoured and remembered through commemorative activities. The department is proud of this dual mandate, just as it is proud to continue to do everything in its power to enhance the programs and services that are important to Canada's veterans and their families.
As you have seen from our 2015-16 supplementary estimates (C) submission, Veterans Affairs Canada's overall total planned spending this fiscal year, including the supplementary estimates, is almost $3.67 billion. That's close to a $150-million or a 4.2% increase over our 2015-16 main estimates budget of $3.52 billion.
As these supplementary estimates show, our first priority is to make sure that veterans and their families have the support they need when they need it, for as long as they need it. For the younger veterans, this often means ensuring that they are able to successfully transition to civilian life. That's why the largest chunk of this new funding, $81.3 million, is for veterans programs and services, the majority of which flow to Canadian Armed Forces veterans through the new Veterans Charter. Another $25.5 million is to enhance the delivery of services and benefits by increasing front-line and case management staffing levels to provide increased support to veterans and their families. These funds will also be used to improve the timeliness of disability benefit decisions so that veterans have earlier access to benefits.
A further $2.7 million in new funding is to support implementation of three new grant programs: the retirement income security benefit, the critical injury benefit, and the family caregiver relief benefit, which were initially approved through VAC's 2015-16 supplementary estimates (A) submission. However, this submission includes an additional $400,000 for the family caregiver relief benefit. It also includes funding to hire resources to implement these three programs, provide online training to primary caregivers, and improve system interoperability between Veterans Affairs and National Defence. With this supplementary funding, we continue to ensure that Canada is there for the men and women and their families who were there for Canada.
Our supplementary estimates also contain $1 million for the community war memorial program, which will allow the program to continue for one more year. This program was initially approved for five years in 2010 and extended for one year to cover the final cost of contributions for the construction of new monuments previously approved by the department.
There is also a return of $200,000 to Canadian Heritage for funds previously provided to VAC to help with a commemorative initiative; however, as the funds were not required, they were returned.
The last item of notice in VAC's supplementary estimates (C) submission is an increase of $3.8 million for an increase in employee benefits plan cost statutory funding, which relates to increased new personnel costs.
It is important to understand that VAC's budget fluctuates each year because of the demand-driven nature of its programs and services. VAC updates its client and expenditure forecast each year to ensure that all veterans who come forward receive the benefits to which they are entitled. Expenses, however, are only incurred for the veterans who actually come forward as qualifying for our programs and services.
As VAC's program budgets can only be used for the purpose for which they were intended, excess funds cannot be redirected for other purposes without explicit consent from Treasury Board. This reality has led to repeated criticism in the media in recent years around lapsed funds; that is to say, our not spending our entire budget. This is primarily attributed to the declining number of veterans we are supporting.
For example, we are forecasting a net decrease of about 11,000 war service veterans and survivors receiving Veterans Affairs Canada benefits this fiscal year. This is the single largest reason for the lapses in our overall spending.
VAC's 2016-17 report on plans and priorities sets our course for the coming year. These plans are driven by three basic principles: care, compassion, and respect.
Our top priority is to provide veterans with excellent service from their first moment of contact with our department. We will place veterans at the centre of everything we do: our philosophies, our ideas, and our operations. This means being proactive and responding quickly to veterans' changing needs with care, compassion, and respect.
Secondly, we will provide veterans with the services they need, when and how they need them, and in ways that work for them. Finally we will work closely with the Department of National Defence to make sure we fully support our Canadian Armed Forces members to make an easier transition to civilian life and focus on their well-being.
In closing, I would like to point out that in this year, as in previous years, approximately 90% of VAC's budget, or $3.3 billion, will flow directly to veterans, their families, and the other Canadians served by VAC.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. Maureen and I would now be happy to answer any questions that you or other committee members may have about any part of these supplementary estimates.
Results: 1 - 8 of 8

Export As: XML CSV RSS

For more data options, please see Open Data