SoVote

Decentralized Democracy

House Hansard - 18

44th Parl. 1st Sess.
December 15, 2021 02:00PM
  • Dec/15/21 6:14:33 p.m.
  • Watch
Resuming debate, the hon. member for Lambton—Kent—Middlesex.
11 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • Dec/15/21 6:14:40 p.m.
  • Watch
  • Re: Bill C-5 
Mr. Speaker, as this is my first time rising to give a speech as a member of the 44th Parliament, I want to take a moment to thank the people of Lambton—Kent—Middlesex for re-electing me to this place on their behalf. It is a responsibility, honour and privilege that I do not take lightly. I am really grateful to them for sending me back here. My re-election was made possible by everyone who supported my campaign, believed in me, had my back and helped me through this journey. With the dedication and professionalism of my team, the passion and commitment of our volunteers, the generosity and sacrifice of our donors and, of course, the love and support of family and friends, we were able to share our positive Conservative vision. I am grateful beyond words. I would not be here without my amazing campaign team. I thank my campaign manager David Sverginsky, my official agent Doug Plummer, and the rest of my core team and staff without whom I would not be here. They are Russ Kykendall, Tony Reznowski, Yvonne Hundey, Anna Marie Young, Todd Gurd, Cheri Davies and Kim Heathcote; and the group of volunteers who canvassed with me almost every day: Archie Nugteren, Mark Etienne, Gerry Rupke, Steve Stellingwerff, Marius, Juliette, Hannah Kurjanowicz, Brandon MacDougall, and my predecessor, Bev Shipley. I would also like to thank Julie, Angela, Holly, Candice and Jennifer for always being there and for their steadfast support throughout my political journey. The sign crew put up over 3,000 signs. I thank them for their hard work and dedication. A special thanks to my parents, Diane and Theo Rood, for their love and support. My dad took on the enormous task of installing the signs, removing them and just being there for me throughout this. I thank my brothers Jeremy Rood and Steele Leacock, and my grandma, Helen Jamrozinski, for their love and support throughout this journey. Going on to the bill that is before us, it should come as no surprise when I say the Conservatives are the party of law and order. We are the party that stands with victims of crime and their loved ones. We are the party that applies common sense and outcome-based principles to protect innocent Canadians from violent criminals who would harm others. We are the party that understands that it is criminals who are committing these crimes, not law-abiding firearms owners, anglers, hunters and sports shooters. The Liberals claim to be serious about getting tough on crime, but their hypocritical actions speak louder than words. Last February, in the previous Parliament, the government introduced Bill C-22. The goal of this harmful legislation was to reduce the sentences for illegal gun smugglers and remove mandatory minimum sentences for many serious offences. That bill died when the election was called, but here we are again with the same bill, but with a different number. Just months before the Prime Minister called an unnecessary election in the middle of a pandemic, my Conservative colleague introduced a private member's bill, which would have imposed tougher sentences for criminals who were caught smuggling or in possession of illegal guns, which is the larger problem. Brian Sauvé, who is the president of the National Police Federation, has said that policies like what the Liberals are advocating for may be politically popular, but they fail to address the root cause of gun violence. He says: The narrative is that we need to restrict gun ownership because that will curtail crime, when really the evidence is that illegal gun trafficking leads to criminals owning guns, which leads to crimes with firearms. Therefore, we need to look at the source of the problem. Crimes with firearms are exactly what the government claims it wants to stop, yet it voted against a bill and continues to fail to support legislation that will do just that. Does that sound like a government that is serious on tackling gun crime for the people of Lambton—Kent—Middlesex? It sounds kind of hypocritical to me. Bill C-22 is back as Bill C-5, but with the same purpose. This legislation is a revolving door for criminals. It would do nothing to stop crime. It would do the exact opposite. It would repeal the penalties for crimes like weapons trafficking, reckless discharge of a firearm, discharge with intent to wound or endanger and armed robbery. It would also remove conditional sentencing for heinous crimes like sexual assault, kidnapping, child abduction, human trafficking, vehicle theft and arson. That tells me the Liberal elites in Ottawa do not care about our safety or the safety of our loved ones. Conservatives like myself will always fight against harmful legislation like Bill C-5. Canadians do not want the justice system to be a constantly revolving door. Common sense must prevail for all common good. I studied criminology in university, and I have friends who are corrections officers, probation and parole officers. I hear the same thing from them all the time. It is the same people revolving through the doors committing the same crimes over and over again. If it is a provincial offence, which is two years less a day, they will not get the kind of help they would need. If they were sent to a federal facility, they would have help for mental health and addictions problems. The government has a role to play in ensuring that Canadians, victims of crime and their families can exist freely and without fear in our society, but in Bill C-5, the Liberals are telling Canadians that these offenses are no big deal. Is it no big deal that someone could leave prison, steal a car, rob several businesses, assaulting the occupants with a weapon, and then attack a police officer on their way out? Apparently, the Liberal government thinks that scenario only deserves a slap on the wrist, not a guaranteed minimum punishment for harmful criminal behaviour. In fact, what is proposed in this bill would allow someone who did all the above the opportunity to not even spend a single day in jail. Again, as a Conservative, I have to stand here and attempt to bring common sense to a government that is clearly showing no indication that it has any sense left, common or not. In fact, some days it feels like the Liberals have removed the words “common sense” from the dictionary entirely. At the end of the day, Bill C-5 gets soft on gun crime and gives great relief to criminals and offenders. It is missing any good reasons why this policy cares for, protects or prevents repeat offences against victims of violent crime in Canada. It misses the mark on what should be targeted to stop crime and illegal guns. As Winnipeg police constable Rob Carver said, “When we seize handguns, the handguns are always, almost 100 per cent, in the possession of people who have no legal right to possess them. They're almost always stolen or illegally obtained.” Again, it is not the law-abiding hunters, farmers and sport shooters who are committing serious crimes. Let us now look at the final part of this so-called landmark progressive legislation. During an unprecedented national overdose crisis, we have a government that is actively trying to enable the criminal proliferation of drug trafficking, importing, exporting and production. Where is the sense in that? I heard from Louis, a constituent in my riding of Lambton—Kent—Middlesex, who asked me, “Can we address the fact that known drug dealers are getting away with murder? We lost a grandchild.” What Canadians want and need is a compassionate approach to mental health and addictions recovery, and this is not found in Bill C-5. In fact, no part of this bill even attempts to touch on the subject, and it is too busy enabling the pushers. The Centre for Addiction and Mental Health estimates the economic burden of mental illness in Canada at $51 billion per year, which includes health care costs, lost productivity and reductions in health-related quality of life. Addictions and mental health issues have costly and far-reaching impacts in our society and must be given proper attention in legislation to combat the crisis. When will the government put forward legislation to address this impact instead of using a real crisis to score cheap political talking points at the cost of protecting Canadians? The Prime Minister and the Liberal members across the floor are all talk. They talk big and they make sweet-sounding promises to address serious concerns about gender-based violence, opioid addiction, systemic racism and other forms of discrimination. They make boldfaced claims to be helping Canadians, but then offer nothing of use. What I see, and what the constituents I represent see when the Liberals grandstand, is hypocrisy. I see before the House a bill that is soft on gun crime and soft on the criminal drug enterprise. Canadians know bills like Bill C-5 are contrary to evidence, countless news stories and the testimony of victims. It should be impossible to ignore the madness of the government’s relentless attempts to gaslight Canadians otherwise. Canadians expect the government to stand up for the rule of law, to protect victims first and to stand up for their rights. The government should be targeting violent criminals, sexual offenders and criminal gangs, and ensuring that the Criminal Code protects Canadians. Any changes should be made in a well-informed manner that protects public safety. As legislators, we must represent and reflect the values of the average Canadian, and Canadians consider the crimes that Bill C-5 relaxes measures against to be extremely serious. By reducing mandatory sentences for serious crimes, Bill C-5 says elected representatives do not need to be accountable to the victims of these crimes. The utter hypocrisy of this bill and those who vote for it is staggering. To vote in favour of this bill signals a victory for violent criminals who commit some of the most heinous crimes against the most vulnerable victims in Canada. It comes at a cost to victims and their families, present and future, and to the dignity of our great nation. That is a fact I find unacceptable, and it is why I will be voting against the bill.
1750 words
All Topics
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • Dec/15/21 6:25:00 p.m.
  • Watch
  • Re: Bill C-5 
Mr. Speaker, I was listening intently to the member opposite, and I really cannot believe what my ears were hearing, this vehement defence of the failed Harper, so-called “tough on crime” policies that have failed Canada over the years. They have resulted in nothing but over-incarceration of indigenous people and Black Canadians for offences that are not serious in nature. This is a defence of policies that the courts have found to be unconstitutional in many respects. Why are the Conservatives so focused on championing policies that have failed us and not looking at data to ensure that Canadians, no matter what background they come from, have an opportunity to be able to serve their sentences in the community and to be rehabilitated and reintegrated back into society?
132 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • Dec/15/21 6:26:04 p.m.
  • Watch
  • Re: Bill C-5 
Mr. Speaker, I talked about victims and needing to protect them. A lot of victims are exactly what the member said; they are also racialized Canadians. I believe that people who commit a crime should be punished for their crime. On mandatory minimums, when I talk to people who are working in corrections and who see these people coming in every day, they feel that if these criminals had actually done time that was reflective of the crime they committed, it would deter them from coming back again and again and committing the same crimes. We need to be protecting victims of crime here.
104 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • Dec/15/21 6:27:00 p.m.
  • Watch
  • Re: Bill C-5 
Mr. Speaker, the Bloc Québécois really believes that there are distinctions to be made when it comes to mandatory minimum sentences. As my colleague stated, we believe that this is not the right time to abolish mandatory minimums for firearm offences, given the Liberal government's failure to respond to the catastrophes and tragedies that have taken place in recent weeks and months, particularly in Montreal. We see that the Conservative Party is hemming and hawing over gun control, particularly for assault weapons. What concrete action is my Conservative colleague proposing to reduce murders committed with firearms if her party does not support initiatives like banning handguns?
111 words
All Topics
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • Dec/15/21 6:27:59 p.m.
  • Watch
  • Re: Bill C-5 
Mr. Speaker, it has been stated here before, and I will state it again: I am an RPAL holder myself. I have to go through rigorous background checks. I have to submit documents every day my background is checked. I do not own a firearm personally. The law-abiding citizens who have a possession and acquisition licence, who are trained, who are hunting and who are farmers like me, who have been out in the woods or in the middle of a field in the middle of the night with wildlife around them, are abiding by the laws of this country. It is not those people who are committing crimes. The people who are committing crimes with handguns are obtaining them illegally. They are getting them from illegal sources. They have no permit or right to own that gun, and then they are committing crimes. Most of these guns are being smuggled across the border from the U.S. People committing these crimes are the ones who should be behind bars, not law-abiding hunters and farmers.
177 words
All Topics
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • Dec/15/21 6:29:09 p.m.
  • Watch
  • Re: Bill C-5 
Mr. Speaker, the problem with the arguments the Conservatives are making is that they are equating the elimination of mandatory minimums with the end of sentencing altogether, and nothing could be further from the truth. On the example the member cited in her speech of someone getting out of prison and committing robbery and assault with a handgun, there is no doubt in my mind that the judge looking at that case would recommend jail time. The Criminal Code already has provision 718.2, sentencing principles, which allow a judge to increase or decrease a sentence based on aggravating factors. My question is a simple one: Why do Conservatives have so little faith in judges to mete out the appropriate sentence based on the crime committed?
126 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • Dec/15/21 6:29:56 p.m.
  • Watch
  • Re: Bill C-5 
Mr. Speaker, I have faith in judges and the judicial system, but sometimes the judges need to have something in front of them in the form of a mandatory minimum sentence so that people who are committing these crimes can get the help they need from the institutions they would go to so that they are not out on the streets.
61 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • Dec/15/21 6:30:44 p.m.
  • Watch
Mr. Speaker, the Insurance Bureau of Canada declared the B.C. floods the most costly severe weather event in the province’s history. The quote for insured private damages is $450 million, but the actual cost is much higher because many affected were uninsured or under-insured. This also does not account for public infrastructure lost. As well, $155 million in insured damage was incurred by wildfires this year, but again this does not take into account those people without coverage. Yesterday the fall economic statement promised $5 billion, through the disaster financial assistance arrangements, for recovery costs related to the recent natural disasters in British Columbia. While this response to the ongoing advocacy of my Conservative colleagues and me is appreciated and reflects the team Canada approach I have been taking, especially with the Minister of Emergency Preparedness, I look forward to the government unpacking this promise and outlining how and where the financial support will be provided in conjunction with the Province of B.C. The funds are tied to fiscal year 2021-2022, which ends in just over three months. The dikes and roads in question that were washed out cannot be rebuilt that fast. Will there be flexibility for these funds to be accessed after March 31? Providing these funds through the disaster financial assistance arrangements program creates additional concerns and questions. Small communities such as Princeton and Merritt in the riding of my colleague, the member for Central Okanagan—Similkameen—Nicola, have expressed that due to the scale of the damage, their tax bases are simply unable to support what would likely be required of them in matching funds. What about Lytton, in my constituency? There literally is no tax base, as 90% of the village burned to the ground. The federal government’s disaster financial assistance arrangements with the Province of B.C. provide no assurances that these small communities will actually receive the support they need. This is causing a lot of stress on local leaders. In his answer on Monday, the Minister of Emergency Preparedness indicated that the federal and provincial governments and indigenous leaders were meeting that very day on this topic. Could the minister share the results of that meeting? Specifically, will a portion of the funds announced go to dike repair and enhancements? I am glad that indigenous leaders were at the table for those meetings, because as wildfires devastated Lytton and surrounding first nations this summer, it became clear that emergency coordination with and notification of indigenous communities affected is woefully insufficient. The recent flooding has only reiterated this reality. In B.C., the First Nations' Emergency Services Society has called for a more integrated alert system and consistent funding after it took days to coordinate and reach remote indigenous communities cut off by the flooding. I spoke with Chief Lampreau of Shackan First Nation last week. Many first nations leaders like him are at a loss. The AFN reports B.C. signed a $29-million emergency services agreement with Indigenous Services Canada in 2018 that included 28 emergency management coordinator positions for first nations. However, these positions were unfilled. Why is that? What concrete measures is the government going to take to ensure resources are in place for the remote indigenous communities that were impacted the most by some of our most recent natural disasters? Again, I would like to thank the government for the $5 billion towards British Columbia and for the collaborative approach the Minister of Emergency Preparedness has taken with me. I hope I hear some concrete answers to some of my questions this evening.
605 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • Dec/15/21 6:34:39 p.m.
  • Watch
Mr. Speaker, I thank the hon. member for Mission—Matsqui—Fraser Canyon for allowing me to provide a more fulsome response on this very important issue. The recent flooding in British Columbia was a nearly unprecedented disaster for the people of the Lower Mainland. It devastated local communities, including those my hon. colleague represents. We must also not forget that this is but the latest weather-related disaster to hit British Columbia this year, with many communities still recovering from the severe wildfires that occurred just a few months ago. As devastating as these events have been, we unfortunately know that they will likely not be the last. Research shows that weather-related natural disasters will only increase in frequency and severity across Canada in the coming years, thanks to the effects of climate change. Climate change is one of the greatest threats of our time. We need to act quickly to build resiliency and better protect our communities. Continued collaboration with our provincial and territorial counterparts will be essential as we move forward with this work. That is why our government has created a new climate disaster resilience committee with our B.C. provincial counterparts. The committee will work closely with indigenous leadership to respond to the immediate needs of British Columbians and look at ways to build back with greater resiliency. One of the main ways that the federal government provides support to Canadians in the wake of disasters such as this is through the disaster financial assistance arrangements program, or DFAA. Through the DFAA, we can provide funding directly to impacted provinces and territories for costs they have incurred. Under the program, the federal government cost-shares up to 90% of all eligible disaster response and recovery costs with provinces and territories when eligible expenditures exceed an established initial threshold based on provincial population. The DFAA also offers an additional 15% top-up for mitigation enhancements for innovative recovery activities that increase future resilience. In yesterday's fall economic statement, as the member acknowledged, our government announced we have set aside $5 billion in 2020, 2021 and 2022 for the federal share of recovery costs under the DFAA, as well as other costs related to the recent natural disasters in British Columbia. I can also confirm that on November 19, B.C. submitted a request for financial assistance and an intent to request an advanced payment under the DFAA. As the event is still active, estimates from the province are still forthcoming and public safety officials are actively engaged with their provincial counterparts to begin work on this package. We know that there is more work to do to support British Columbians, not just through the recovery from this crisis, but also to protect all Canadians from future disasters. Through the flood focused national disaster mitigation program, our government supports cost-shared investments in flood mitigation that help to identify, plan for and prevent floods risk. The disaster mitigation and adaptation fund delivered by Infrastructure Canada also provides funding for infrastructure projects that reduce our risk. We have also set up a task force on flood insurance to explore ways to protect homeowners in areas with a risk of flooding, including the possibility of a low-cost national flood program. It is expected to submit its report by spring of 2022. At the same time, Indigenous Services Canada is working with first nations partners to examine the unique context on reserve by establishing a dedicated steering committee on first nations home flood insurance needs. As we look at building back, people in communities deserve to be better informed about their flood risk as they plan for the future. That is why we are investing $63.8 million over three years to work with the provinces and territories to complete flood maps for higher-risk areas.
640 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • Dec/15/21 6:38:34 p.m.
  • Watch
Mr. Speaker, I welcome the member for Ottawa Centre into the House of Commons in his new role as parliamentary secretary. I would ask him to answer a couple of my questions very specifically. First, the funds announced under the DFAA are for this fiscal year. Will they still be available in the following fiscal year? As the member mentioned, some of the requests coming from the province are still forthcoming. Second, again related to the DFAA, the situation in B.C. is so unique. Will there be flexibility with small communities that may need more assistance than usual to cover their portion of contribution under this program? Third, can the member opposite comment on the need for the Government of Canada to renegotiate the contracts with the Province of B.C. on disaster mitigation and management on reserve?
139 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • Dec/15/21 6:39:41 p.m.
  • Watch
Mr. Speaker, I again want to thank the member for his advocacy on behalf of his constituents. This is obviously an unprecedented circumstance, but I want to make it very clear that the government will be there for the people of British Columbia. We will work with British Columbians and the Government of British Columbia to ensure they have all the necessary supports to rebuild after this disaster, and to be ready for any future disasters as well. As the funds were announced yesterday, we will continue to work closely with the British Columbia government to make sure we have all the estimates, expenditures and requests in order. I assure the member that the minister and I will work closely with him to make all information available to him in due course.
132 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • Dec/15/21 6:40:36 p.m.
  • Watch
Mr. Speaker, tonight I am following up on a question I first asked on December 7, eight days ago. For the context of my question, it is important to note that in the eight days since I asked this question, according to the statistics, 88 Canadians will have died by suicide. In that time, in those eight days, we will have lost 88 Canadians to suicide. It was 370 days ago that the House came together and voted unanimously on a motion from the member for Cariboo—Prince George to take immediate action to establish a national 24-7 suicide prevention hotline: 988. The motion that everyone in this place agreed to was: That, given that the alarming rate of suicide in Canada constitutes a national health crisis, the House call on the government to take immediate action, in collaboration with our provinces, to establish a national suicide prevention hotline that consolidates all suicide crisis numbers into one easy to remember three-digit [number] (988) hotline that is accessible to all Canadians. We unanimously passed a motion that referenced the “alarming rate of suicide in Canada”. We called it a “national health crisis”, and we demanded that the House take immediate action to institute this nationwide 988 suicide prevention hotline. That was over a year ago: 370 days ago now. I will note that in the six months Parliament sat after the motion passed, the government did nothing substantive on the issue. We then left the House in June, knowing we were going into an election campaign. The government had trouble instituting a three-digit hotline to save what amounts to 4,000 Canadians who lost their lives to suicide over the past year, according to the statistics. We have not been able to institute that. We are still consulting, apparently, according to the answer, and the CRTC is reviewing, but let us point out that this is a number that is not being used right now. Parliament has agreed, stakeholders are unanimous in their support and I would assume Canadians would be unanimous in their support for this. We managed, in the ensuing five months after the House broke in June and knowing we were going into an election, to hold a $600-million election in the midst of a global pandemic. We were able to do that, but we are still consulting on a three-digit suicide prevention hotline. I was not satisfied with the answer from the minister that this is sitting with the CRTC's bureaucratic process. In this country, there are very few issues that all parliamentarians agree on. Certainly this is one such issue we could act on with some urgency, in the interests of saving the number of lives of Canadians we are talking about.
467 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • Dec/15/21 6:44:24 p.m.
  • Watch
Mr. Speaker, I thank the hon. member for Edmonton—Wetaskiwin for his important question. I would first like to say that our thoughts are with the families and communities that have lost loved ones to suicide. Our government is committed to implementing and fully funding a three-digit mental health crisis and suicide prevention hotline. The CRTC launched a regulatory proceeding on June 3, 2021, to consult on the proposed three-digit hotline, and the initial public consultation closed on September 1. The 247 interventions from stakeholders and members of the public are available online. The parties were able to respond to these interventions before October 1. Following a petition from stakeholders representing persons with disabilities, the CRTC reopened the consultations to allow for new interventions in accessible formats, such as video. The public consultations will remain open until January 31, 2022, and these interventions and replies will become part of the public record that the CRTC will examine to make its determinations. We understand that this crisis line is urgently needed and we are going to make sure it is done right. This includes making sure that the crisis line is able to connect people to the most appropriate service in the most appropriate way. Canadians must have access to suicide prevention services when they need them. Our government is committed to expanding the capacity and providing virtual services. The implementation of a three-digit suicide prevention number will build upon our current support of a pan-Canadian suicide prevention service. Budget 2019 provided $21 million over five years to the Centre for Addiction and Mental Health to develop, implement, expand and sustain a fully operational pan-Canadian suicide prevention service. Through this initiative, by 2023, people across Canada will have access to crisis support in English and French when they need it and through the platform of their choice, including telephone, text messaging or chat. Through the 2020 fall economic statement, our government invested a further $50 million to bolster the capacity of distress centres. The Public Health Agency of Canada is currently overseeing a first round of funding for 57 distress centres for the fall and winter of 2021-22. A second round of funding, which closed on October 6, targets recipients with new or unmet needs, as well as organizations excluded from the first round of funding. Funding applications are now under review. In addition, $2 million of this funding will support the development of resources to assist distress centres in meeting the needs of diverse and vulnerable populations. The pandemic and lockdowns exacerbated many people's social isolation and distress and made it harder to access health care, which is why it is so important for us to work with our partners to introduce this national mental health support line. We are there for Canadians when they need us most.
477 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • Dec/15/21 6:48:33 p.m.
  • Watch
Mr. Speaker, I am thankful this is an issue that members of all parties can agree on. I will point out for those watching who are interested right now that if they do a Google search and wade through all of the documentation on the government website eventually they will find that there is a 24-7 number for the Canada Suicide Prevention Service. The number is 1-833-456-4566 for those who need that help. Hopefully, soon they will not have to do a Google search to find that number. To close, my question for the hon. member is this. By what date will Canada finally have an operational three-digit 988 suicide prevention hotline?
117 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • Dec/15/21 6:49:28 p.m.
  • Watch
Mr. Speaker, I assure the member opposite that I share his concern. Our government is 100% committed to fully funding this three-digit mental health crisis and suicide prevention hotline. The ongoing consultations by the Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission will help identify barriers and, should any be identified, determine how best to address them. We look forward to the outcome of this proceeding. The CRTC process will also inform our understanding of the resources necessary to implement a three-digit number. In the meantime, the Canada Suicide Prevention Service will continue to make direct and immediate suicide prevention support available to people across Canada. Anyone can talk to a trained responder in French or English 24 hours a day, seven days a week.
125 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • Dec/15/21 6:50:42 p.m.
  • Watch
Mr. Speaker, it is a pleasure to rise in the House today on behalf of the citizens of Kamloops—Thompson—Cariboo. Veterans and their families feel left behind by the government, to say the least. The veterans ombudsman, veterans advocacy groups and caseworkers from Veterans Affairs Canada have all come forward ringing alarm bells about the failures of the government when it comes to veterans. What has the government's response been on this point? It has been largely silence. Allow me to paint a picture of Veterans Affairs Canada and the reality of its situation today. Currently, there is a backlog of tens of thousands of veterans waiting for their claims to be processed and adjudicated by the department. Some are waiting as long as two years for therapeutics or assisted-living devices. I would ask government members to imagine waiting two years for the necessities of life, such as a wheelchair and hearing aids, or compensation for injuries sustained while serving our country. With the greatest of respect, it is shameful that we treat our veterans this way. In the two years that the backlogs have been particularly accrued, we have seen two elections from the government and a doubling of the national debt. However, none of the money seems to be going toward veterans. How should we deal with these claims? The way to deal with them would be through case managers at Veterans Affairs Canada. The department set a target of 25 cases per manager. This would allow each case manager to get to know files quite well. Unfortunately, the reality is that there are 40 to 50 different files for each case manager. That is less than one hour per week for each person who served our country. I recall that in my former life as a parole officer, it was the same thing. When a person doing a job does not have time to adequately address files, things will ultimately slip through the cracks. We should be supplying veterans with more resources, not less. When workloads get too high, we see burnout. Commensurate with burnout, we see stress leave and medical leave, and then work gets shifted onto peers. When work gets shifted onto peers, we see more of the same, and a vicious cycle keeps perpetuating itself. Seventy-four per cent of caseworkers say their workload has negatively affected their health, 32% have had to take time off work, 18% sought professional help and 25% have considered leaving the department altogether. The government plans to cut 300 caseworkers in March 2022, and these are some of the people, if not all, who have been hired to alleviate the current backlog. Apparently, according to the government, veterans are asking for more than we can give them. That is straight from the Prime Minister. The budget never balanced itself. Will the backlog of veterans also clear itself, in the government's eyes?
489 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • Dec/15/21 6:54:58 p.m.
  • Watch
Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank the member for Kamloops—Thompson—Cariboo for his question. Of course, I appreciate the opportunity to respond. Once again, it is an honour to be parliamentary secretary for Veterans Affairs. My riding of Sackville—Preston—Chezzetcook has one of the highest per capita populations of veterans in Canada, and it is an honour to represent them. First, I would thank all past and present members of the Canadian Armed Forces and their families for the sacrifices they have made to keep us safe inside and outside of our country. It is not uncommon for some CAF members to leave the military bearing physical or mental wounds from their service. What they do is hard and gritty work that most of us cannot imagine, yet they do it anyway, well aware of the hazards and risks they will have to face along the way. As a government, we know we have the responsibility for veterans and the Canadian Armed Forces and their families, whether they go to Veterans Affairs to improve their physical or mental health, to get financial assistance or some help to find a job, or maybe to learn about the post-service training and education we offer. The department has programs and services available to them. We recognize that some veterans are sometimes frustrated with the process and indeed that case managers are dealing with a heavy workload. Our government is grateful to them for the good work they are doing to manage this difficult situation and to ensure that all veterans, including those with complex needs, are receiving timely and efficient services. I can also say that on many occasions this year, the Minister of Veterans Affairs has expressed his appreciation to his staff for their hard work and urged employees to always take care of themselves. More concretely, here are some of the steps our government has taken to address this issue. Going back to 2018, Veterans Affairs received temporary funding for additional case managers. In November 2021, there were 476 case workers at the department, which is double the number of case workers since 2016. They are there to support veterans who are facing complex challenges. It is a collaborative process between veterans and their case manager teams to identify needs and goals and to create a plan to help veterans achieve independence, health and well-being. The case management efforts aim to ensure that all veterans receive the support they need when they need it. As recently as last month, our minister committed to hiring even more staff, as we indicated in our platform. We have also implemented several initiatives to improve management practices, like implementing guided supports, which sees a veterans services agent work to support veterans with various challenges. These are some of the large-scale changes we have made, and we continue to work toward implementing them fully. However, the fact that we are making these investments for veterans services shows we are placing a high priority on ensuring that veterans and their families receive the supports they need.
519 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • Dec/15/21 6:58:56 p.m.
  • Watch
Mr. Speaker, I commend and congratulate the hon. parliamentary secretary on his appointment. I had some remarks prepared, but I want to address some of the parliamentary secretary's comments. The parliamentary secretary said that people had been hired. However, the information in my office is that many of the people who have been hired will not be retained past March 2022. Could the hon. parliamentary secretary please answer this question: How many will be retained after March 2022? The hon. parliamentary secretary further noted that the government is committed to hiring more staff. My second question is: When will that staff be hired? The third is: What are the case numbers today? The fourth is: What will the case numbers be in March 2022? These are four tangible questions. If the parliamentary secretary could answer them, I would be obliged.
141 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • Dec/15/21 7:00:12 p.m.
  • Watch
Mr. Speaker, Canada's veterans have all made enormous sacrifices, for which we are very grateful. We recognize our responsibility to them and in particular to those who come to Veterans Affairs Canada with complex post-career cases that require close attention. We recently invested nearly $200 million to improve services to veterans and ensure we make decisions in a more timely manner. That investment is paying off and we are already seeing major decreases in the backlog of claims. We will continue to do everything we can to make sure that our veterans and their families are assessed as quickly and efficiently as possible.
105 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border