Hansard
Consult the user guide
For assistance, please contact us
Consult the user guide
For assistance, please contact us
Add search criteria
Results: 1 - 15 of 27
View Majid Jowhari Profile
Lib. (ON)
View Majid Jowhari Profile
2020-02-19 15:27 [p.1257]
moved for leave to introduce Bill C-207, An Act to amend the Criminal Code (presentence report).
He said: Mr. Speaker, it is a great honour for me to rise today to reintroduce my private member's bill as the member of Parliament for Richmond Hill. The bill would amend paragraph 721(3)(a) of the Criminal Code. I would also like to thank the hon. member for Mississauga—Erin Mills for once again seconding the bill.
The bill would mandate that alongside such information as age, character, behaviour and willingness to make amends, information outlining mental health disorders and available mental health care programs for accused be provided in a pre-sentence report, unless otherwise specified. Access to such information is vital to ensuring that Canadians with histories of mental illness are afforded care, compassion and appropriate treatment throughout the process of their rehabilitation.
I urge all members of the House to support the bill.
View Gary Vidal Profile
CPC (SK)
Madam Speaker, I rise tonight to support the Wet'suwet'en people. Over the past weeks, news organizations from coast to coast have mobilized to every blockade and every protest, vying for sound bites and clips to share on the morning news and on their social media. Who has been forgotten in all of this? It seems to me it is the people of Wet'suwet'en nation.
Politicians across Canada and in this House have taken it upon themselves to speak on behalf of the people. I do not want to even pretend to speak on behalf of these people, because I think that would be foolish for me to claim to do so. It would lack credibility and integrity. Let me be clear, however. We are at a very important point in our history, and I intend to be on the side of the Wet'suwet'en people tonight, who have the right to self-determination and to control their own destiny.
The elected leadership of all 20 first nations whose territory runs along the pathway of Coastal GasLink, eight hereditary chiefs and over 80% of the people are in favour of getting this pipeline built. I was the mayor of the city of Meadow Lake for eight years and I know just how difficult it is to get 80% support for a project. It is nearly impossible. That is why I appreciate the hard work that the elected chiefs have put in to negotiate an extremely successful deal with Coastal LNG on behalf of their people.
There is over $1 billion in commitments to indigenous workers and to indigenous-owned firms because of this project. These dollars could be used for important investments in these communities such as housing, mental health, education, recreation and many other things. However, it is not just about the dollars being invested in these communities; it is about the creation of well-payed, sustainable jobs.
I represent a riding that has a population that is over 70% indigenous. During the election campaign and in the months since, I have had many opportunities to talk to people about my vision for northern Saskatchewan, to talk to people about the opportunity to have well-paying, sustainable jobs. It is a very similar theme to what we talk about tonight when we consider this project.
The benefits I have spoken about over and over again are threefold. First, there is an obvious economic benefit that comes with having a good job and being able to take care of oneself and one's family. Second, there is an innate need in each of us to be fulfilled, to feel valued and to have a sense of self-worth. There is nothing greater than the feeling one experiences after coming home, having put in an honest day's work. Third, the most important benefit that I have been talking about over the last several months is the hope that comes from the opportunity of having a good job.
Youth suicide in northern remote communities is very real, and it is a heartbreaking crisis. I have spoken many times about how the suicide crisis in northern Saskatchewan is due to a lack of hope. When young people can look up to those they respect and admire, such as their parents, their uncles, their brothers and sisters, or maybe their older cousins, and see them succeed by being part of the industry in northern Saskatchewan, they have hope. They have hope for a better future and they no longer have to consider suicide. I realize that a good job does not solve every problem, but it sure is a good start and it goes a long way.
The question becomes how we create these jobs. I have spoken consistently about creating partnerships between indigenous communities and private industry. These partnerships create opportunity for people in remote northern communities to fully participate in the economic well-being of Canada as a whole. This project is a perfect example of that model at work.
We simply cannot allow a minority of protestors to stand in the way of the will of the Wet'suwet'en nation. These protestors have taken extraordinary measures to hold Canada hostage, compromising the safety of our rail infrastructure, blocking and intimidating people attempting to go to work and in some cases physically assaulting elected members of a provincial legislature.
These blockades have had real effects on my constituents. I have heard from farmers in my riding that many are being told they will not be able to deliver the grain they have contracted for February and March. Canada's reputation as a stable supplier is at risk. Our farmers are risking losing global customers, and they will find other suppliers.
These are people's livelihoods we are talking about. It is how they feed their families. It is what heats their homes. These blockades have to end. If we allow a small minority to succeed in blocking this project, I am concerned that it will be impossible for future projects to ever see the light of day.
Canada's courts have been very clear. The standard for meeting the fiduciary duties for consultation and accommodation are very high. These thresholds have been met by the Coastal LNG project and they ought to be respected.
My colleague referenced Ellis Ross in her speech a few moments ago, and I want to do the same. Ellis Ross is the B.C. MLA for Skeena and a former councillor and subsequent chief councillor for the Haisla Nation. He served in that role for 14 years and had the following to say recently:
The heated debate over who holds authority over the territory of First Nations — be it hereditary chiefs or elected band leaders — may serve the interests of those seeking to disrupt construction of the Coastal GasLink pipeline, but it does absolutely nothing for the well-being of an average Aboriginal living on reserve.
He went on to further say:
Allowing outsiders to undermine and dismiss years of careful consideration and consultation with elected chiefs who want nothing more than to secure a brighter future for their membership, is quite unacceptable....
I am not naive enough to not realize there are members of the Wet'suwet'en nation who are not in favour of this pipeline. Of note, four of the 12 hereditary chiefs, as well as approximately 15% of the people, would fit in that category.
I will always support the rights of those not in favour to protest peacefully, but as with any major decision, indigenous or non-indigenous, total consensus is often unachievable. That is why authentic relationships must be developed so we can have difficult conversations when the need arises.
Let me share from my own personal experience and journey in this regard. As I said earlier, 70% of my riding is indigenous. We grew up going to school together, playing sports together, and in general, living shoulder to shoulder.
Later in life when I became mayor, I had the privilege of working with and developing strong relationships with four chiefs from Flying Dust First Nation who served with me when I was mayor. We shared the challenges of water supply, policing, development activities, recreation and many other matters. It is my sincere belief that we were able to navigate these challenges because we invested in positive and authentic relationships prior to the issues being put on the table.
I truly appreciate the effort the Minister of Indigenous Services has made recently to have dialogue, but unfortunately, the Prime Minister has left him in the unenviable position of having to deal with this in a reactive manner rather than in the proactive manner it deserved. It is clear that these attempts to have dialogue suddenly in the wake of a crisis are too little and far too late.
The government seems to be focused on blaming the Harper government for all of its failures, but the Liberals have had four and a half years and all we hear is virtue signalling and lip service.
In my riding, during the campaign I consistently heard the terms “empty promises” and “unfulfilled commitments” from my indigenous friends. That has been made abundantly clear over the past few weeks, with the choices the Prime Minister has made to prioritize a seat on the United Nations Security Council instead of dealing with the crisis here in Canada. That is not leadership, and right now leadership is what this country needs.
We are asking for a common sense approach to this crisis, respect the rule of law, open authentic dialogue on reconciliation and to not allow the minority to overrule the majority.
As a former mayor of Meadow Lake, I know how important these development projects are to indigenous communities. It is a real and tangible path to economic freedom, self-government and true reconciliation. That is why I am standing today in solidarity with the elected councillors, hereditary chiefs and the people of the first nation.
The Prime Minister said in the House today that patience may be in short supply. It seems that the commitment to reconciliation is also in short supply. The Prime Minister did say something I agree with, which is that we all have a stake in this, that we need to find a solution and we need to find it very soon. I would only add that we should have started looking for a solution sooner.
Today in the National Post, Derek Burney wrote, “A minority government should not mean that we have no government.” In the spirit of collaboration then, I encourage everyone to take a deep breath, refocus our efforts, shut out the radical minority and take earnest steps toward authentic reconciliation.
View Steven Blaney Profile
CPC (QC)
Mr. Speaker, the minister should apply the existing laws, because he is certainly not familiar with the law. The law is clear that the police can suspend a firearms licence, and they can also prevent someone with mental health issues or someone involved in criminal activities from acquiring firearms.
The law is clear, so nothing needs to be changed. Why go after law-abiding citizens instead of tackling street gangs, which are the real problem?
View Bill Blair Profile
Lib. (ON)
View Bill Blair Profile
2020-02-06 14:34 [p.1033]
Mr. Speaker, in the face of the constant threat that women in abusive relationships face from the potential of firearms in the home and the individuals who lose their lives to suicide, for anyone to suggest nothing needs to be done is unconscionable.
Red flag laws have overwhelmingly proven their effectiveness because they empower more than just the limited authority of the police; they give victims, families, teachers, doctors and elders the opportunity to intervene and to keep people safe.
Some hon. members: Oh, oh!
View Rob Moore Profile
CPC (NB)
View Rob Moore Profile
2020-02-05 14:54 [p.954]
Mr. Speaker, last year, the House passed a bill by the member for St. Albert—Edmonton that would help jurors seek medical or psychiatric counselling for the horrific images and testimony that they deal with at a trial. The bill passed the House will all-party support. Since then, some provinces and territories have moved forward with their own measures to support jurors. Meanwhile, the government has failed to act.
When will the Prime Minister take action and address his responsibility to Canadians fulfilling their civic duty as jurors?
View Justin Trudeau Profile
Lib. (QC)
View Justin Trudeau Profile
2020-02-05 14:55 [p.954]
Mr. Speaker, we recognize that there are more investments that need to be made in mental health support for Canadians, whether it is for PTSD for veterans, correctional services officers or policemen and women, or whether it is moving forward on greater supports for young people, indigenous communities or people who have experiences within our justice system.
We know there is more to do on fighting for mental health, which is why we actually made a commitment of billions of dollars more in investments in mental health for the provinces. We are looking forward to working on that.
View Bob Benzen Profile
CPC (AB)
View Bob Benzen Profile
2020-02-05 14:57 [p.955]
Mr. Speaker, section 5 of the Firearms Act says that a person who has threatened or committed a violent crime, a crime related to harassment, drug crimes or has serious mental health issues is unable to have a firearms licence. A person without a gun licence cannot legally have a gun.
It seems that the Prime Minister's red-flag proposal is a solution in search of a problem. Is the Prime Minister's proposal different from what has existed for decades or was he simply unaware of the law?
View Justin Trudeau Profile
Lib. (QC)
View Justin Trudeau Profile
2020-02-05 14:57 [p.955]
Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to be able to inform the member opposite of what we are planning to do.
There are many individuals who have a firearms licence and own firearms and who begin to present a threat to themselves or to their family. At that point, medical health professionals can alert them not to just take away the firearms, which exists—
Some hon. members: Oh, oh!
View Justin Trudeau Profile
Lib. (QC)
View Justin Trudeau Profile
2020-02-05 14:58 [p.955]
Mr. Speaker, the police currently have the ability to remove firearms from someone who presents a threat to themselves or others, but they cannot suspend the licence and prevent that person from acquiring new firearms. That is what the red-flag law is all about.
View Glen Motz Profile
CPC (AB)
Mr. Speaker, I am rising on a point of privilege arising out of question period. When the Prime Minister was responding to a question asked by one of my colleagues, he misled the House in his statement. He said “they”, meaning the police, cannot suspend the licence of an individual and then prevent that individual from acquiring a firearm.
I am here to tell the Prime Minister, through you, Mr. Speaker, that section 5 of the Canadian Firearms Act allows that to happen specifically, and I can read it for you, as well as section 117 of the Criminal Code.
View Monique Pauzé Profile
BQ (QC)
View Monique Pauzé Profile
2020-02-05 17:50 [p.981]
Madam Speaker, as this is my first time rising for a debate, I want to begin by thanking the people of my riding, Repentigny, who put their trust in me once again last October. I hope to be worthy of their trust.
I will address two aspects of this debate, namely dairy producers and, of course, aluminum.
I will talk about the lack of consideration for the dairy farmers of Quebec from a completely different perspective than people might expect. That perspective is necessary because we have to find solutions. This is imperative.
I will start by reminding hon. members that Quebec's dairy producers are resilient. They live and breathe their work 365 days a year. They look after their herd, invest in their facilities and prepare the next generation. It is not easy, because the economic outlook is something of a concern.
I invite hon. members to put the numbers aside and give a thought to the human dimension of the consequences of agreements on a top-notch nourishing industry.
The member for Mégantic—L'Érable and the Standing Committee on Agriculture and Agri-Food came to a sad conclusion in the summer of 2019. They heard testimony from artisanal farmers and agricultural producers who were struggling and facing real psychological distress. If you know what rural areas are like, you know that people in the regions help each other and work together. However, when pressures, obligations and constraints increase, but protections disappear, distress is inevitable.
Would it be fair to think that, since the Minister of Agriculture and Agri-Food launched a campaign acknowledging that the agricultural industry is struggling, the agreement should work along the same lines instead of causing the industry any additional distress?
In Quebec, the Au cœur des familles agricoles organization has been instrumental in this area for 10 years now. Since 2016, in collaboration with the Canadian Association for Suicide Prevention and the Union des producteurs agricoles, the organization has trained 1,200 industry workers to recognize psychological distress in farmers and direct them to specialized resources.
As we have said in the House, supply management is an economic model that suits Quebec well. It goes well with our culture. This economic and trade model is what allows for stability and predictability, which was exactly what the agriculture industry asked for during negotiations for this new agreement.
In its current form, CUSMA's provisions and economic repercussions for Quebec's dairy industry are troubling. The Bloc Québécois strongly believes we must condemn all of the harms that our dairy farmers will suffer. We will never stop demanding that this government and the House respect Quebec, and we will never stop calling for consistency and integrity on this file.
We have been doing this for two months now, but I will now set the record straight yet again on the aluminum industry's position on CUSMA.
The House has repeatedly heard that Jean Simard, the president and CEO of the Aluminium Association of Canada, agreed with the current CUSMA. However, Mr. Simard made his position clear to the House of Commons Standing Committee on Finance yesterday. My colleague from Joliette asked him straight out whether he would rather have had an agreement like the one the steel sector got. Mr. Simard answered that that was what the association had asked for and was about to get, thanks to the efforts of Ms. Freeland and her team. However, at the end of the negotiations, Mexico said yes to steel but no to aluminum for strategic reasons.
Mr. Simard gave the committee an honest answer. We know that a committee involves multiple stakeholders, detailed questions and background work, since members take the time to study the topic being debated by the committee. Mr. Simard's candid answers clearly show that the aluminum industry was hoping to get the same protections as the steel sector.
Where in Canada is there a dynamic aluminum industry with tremendous potential for expansion? Where has this industry been creating jobs for decades, well-paying jobs that allow workers to develop professionally, start a family in their region, and in turn, contribute to the regional economic vitality that all levels of government so desperately want?
Well, that place is Quebec.
CUSMA proposes an economic free trade model that will allow aluminum from China to flood the North American market via Mexico. That is what we have been saying over and over for months now.
Parts manufacturing should be done within partner countries under the agreement. However, unlike steel, the metal used for manufacturing could come from anywhere. Mr. Simard was very clear on that point in committee yesterday.
What we want to hear from the government is simply a statement from the Prime Minister along the same lines as what he said the night of his election victory.
Here is what he said: “Dear Quebeckers, I heard your message tonight. You want to continue to go forward with us, but you also want to ensure that the voice of Quebec can be heard even more in Ottawa. And I can tell you that my team and I will be there for you.”
Were those words meaningless, forgotten as soon as they were said?
The Bloc Québécois wants to work in a proactive and practical way to help Quebec's aluminum industry and obtain fair results. We want to work with the government to find solutions. We refuse to accept that this agreement is already settled and that it must absolutely be signed.
The conditions currently set out in CUSMA regarding this industry will cause serious harm to thousands of Quebec workers and Quebec's economy. Since I am our party's environment critic, I would be remiss if I failed to mention the absolutely essential manufacturing process used by the aluminum plants in the Saguenay—Lac-Saint-Jean region.
Alcoa and Rio Tinto chose the Arvida aluminum plant to establish a research and development centre called Elysis, valued at over $550 million. Together, they will develop all of the technology needed to eliminate greenhouse gas emissions in the production of aluminum and produce pure oxygen. Does the Prime Minister remember when that project was unveiled? He was at the project launch in 2018.
The aluminum industry is not only changing and developing its potential with a clean, renewable and nationally-owned source of energy, but it is also producing aluminum using a zero-emission technology developed in Quebec. How many inconsistencies must we point out before the government does the right thing?
Since I am running out of time, I will not talk about the importance of concrete action to reduce GHG emissions. The aluminum industry is on the right track, and I encourage members of the House to review this issue and be honest with their caucuses about what I am saying.
Let me be clear: The Bloc Québécois is not against free trade. Nevertheless, we believe that, in any trade or other relationship, the parties must communicate, be open, negotiate and make compromises. It would be disingenuous to argue that Quebec's economy was not ignored in the CUSMA negotiations. I gave two examples of that. Members of the House of Commons who claim it was not ignored are, in my opinion, acting in bad faith or are misinformed on the agreement.
We will not ignore what industry representatives are telling us. They came to Parliament Hill last week. During the election period, Quebeckers voted for a voice that would raise their concerns here, in this chamber. That is exactly what we are doing and that is exactly what we will continue to do.
View Robert Kitchen Profile
CPC (SK)
View Robert Kitchen Profile
2020-01-29 14:13 [p.625]
Mr. Speaker, when it comes to mental health, we need to reduce the stigma and raise awareness.
Canadians from coast to coast to coast struggle with mental health issues, and the Bell Let's Talk campaign has done and continues to do incredible work addressing the stigma surrounding it.
Talking openly about mental health can be difficult, yet many Canadians from all walks of life are affected. One of the main goals of Bell Let's Talk Day is to open up that conversation without judgment or stigma, while also raising funds for Canadian mental health organizations.
The theme of the 2020 campaign is “Mental Health: Every Action Counts”. Not only is Bell focused on removing the stigma associated with mental health, it also expands its strategy to include supporting world-class research, improving access to care and leading by example in workplace mental health.
With 5¢ being donated to Canadian mental health organizations for every view, I encourage all Canadians to share the Bell Let's Talk Day video on their social media channels or by sending a message through their Bell carrier.
Let us join the conversation and help create positive change now and into the future.
View Todd Doherty Profile
CPC (BC)
View Todd Doherty Profile
2020-01-29 14:17 [p.625]
Mr. Speaker, today is Bell Let's Talk Day, a day when we are all encouraged to talk about mental health. Mental health affects us all. Two out of three people suffer in silence, fearing judgment and rejection, and far too often this leads to suicide. It is on all of us as leaders to break this silence, to build an environment of acceptance and understanding, where those who are suffering silently can come out of the shadows and know they will be believed and they are not weak.
My best friend committed suicide when I was 14. Since that time, I have attended far too many funerals and sat with far too many families who are left behind to pick up the pieces because of suicide. Therefore, on this day, my message to those who are suffering is this. They are not weak; they are loved. It is okay not to be okay. Our world is a better place because they are in it.
I urge my colleagues in the House to talk about mental health not just today but every day. I ask them to take a moment to ask these three words of a friend, a loved one, a colleague or even a neighbour: “Are you okay?” I ask them to take a moment to listen as they may just save a life.
View Lyne Bessette Profile
Lib. (QC)
View Lyne Bessette Profile
2020-01-29 15:11 [p.635]
Mr. Speaker, agriculture is a dynamic industry rife with opportunity. Since today is Bell Let's Talk Day, it is important to remember that the agriculture sector is not immune from mental distress. As part of their job, farmers have to cope with increasingly unpredictable weather conditions and global markets, and the uncertainty that this creates can weigh heavily on them.
Many organizations, such as Au coeur des familles agricoles in Quebec and the Farm Stress Line in Saskatchewan, are making outstanding efforts to support our farmers' well-being.
Could the Prime Minister—
View Justin Trudeau Profile
Lib. (QC)
View Justin Trudeau Profile
2020-01-29 15:12 [p.635]
Mr. Speaker, I thank the member for Brome—Missisquoi for her work and for her question.
Mental health is a societal issue. We care about farmers' well-being. It can be hard for farmers experiencing mental distress to confide in people close to them. We are providing support and a range of mental health awareness initiatives, and we are funding research to gain a better understanding of the situation. We want to make sure that farmers and their families know that there are resources available to help them through tough times.
Results: 1 - 15 of 27 | Page: 1 of 2

1
2
>
>|
Export As: XML CSV RSS

For more data options, please see Open Data