Senator Gold: Again, the government is working with its partners and with the First Nations community. I’m advised that the Red Cross has been activated. It’s coordinating the evacuation of community members affected by severe flooding, and Indigenous Services Canada is providing funding to the First Nations for emergency flood response.

I do not have information about what measures might be taken or could be taken to provide a more permanent solution to this problem, which is a recurring one. I will certainly make inquiries and respond back.

Hon. Marc Gold (Government Representative in the Senate): With pleasure. Thank you, senator.

Chief Peguis was one of five chiefs who signed an 1817 treaty with Lord Selkirk. This was the first land treaty signed in Western Canada. The largest First Nation in Manitoba is the Peguis First Nation, named in honour of Chief Peguis. This is the same community, unfortunately, currently facing the crisis of flooding in Manitoba, which was referred to in Senator Wells’ question.

(For text of Delayed Answers, see Appendix.)

Hon. Dennis Glen Patterson: Honourable senators, I am probably not known to often praise our current federal government, but when it is deserved I am very willing to do that.

Last October, when fuel contamination in Nunavut’s capital city’s water system made our water undrinkable, a crisis that lasted 60 days happened — not only during the challenges of managing the pandemic crisis but also coinciding with the onset of winter, when an otherwise alternative local water supply at the nearby Sylvia Grinnell River was rapidly freezing.

The City of Iqaluit applied for relief under the federal government’s Disaster Mitigation and Adaptation Fund. On April 1, 2022, Prime Minister Trudeau, in a virtual press conference held in Iqaluit, announced to the Iqaluit mayor and council the contribution of $214 million from that fund. That funding will allow the city to create a new water reservoir above Lake Geraldine and to improve the existing water distribution system, which has been ruptured by climate change. Since first applied for, the funds were even increased to take into account cost inflation since the first engineering cost estimate was done.

In this connection, I wish to particularly commend our Minister of Northern Affairs, the Honourable Dan Vandal, and Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs, Infrastructure and Communities, the Honourable Dominic LeBlanc, for quickly responding to this serious water crisis that impacted my home community of Iqaluit.

I’d like to also acknowledge the support of the Senate Standing Committee on National Finance, which graciously allowed me to ask a question, through Senate colleague and Chair Percy Mockler. We asked Minister Freeland to acknowledge the urgent requirement for capital funding — then estimated at $190 million to repair Iqaluit’s water system — when she appeared at that committee’s hearings during the crisis and following the fall economic update.

The Mayor of Iqaluit, Kenny Bell, indefatigably travelled to Ottawa to lobby the federal government and, in his characteristic straightforward fashion at a press conference, scolded a local reporter who asked why it had taken so long to address Iqaluit’s longstanding water issues caused by climate change. The mayor noted how “. . . amazing and unbelievably fast” the federal response had been once the formal application was submitted.

I, too, am so grateful for Canada’s response to this water crisis in Nunavut’s capital community but, in saying that, I want to acknowledge that most of Nunavut’s 24 other communities are still out of compliance with their existing water licences, as well as many First Nations communities in Southern Canada that have long laboured under boil water advisories.

Thank you, qujannamimariaaluk. Taima.

Hon. Jane Cordy: Honourable senators, oftentimes we can get swept up in our thoughts or the everyday living of life, and those things can be overwhelming. It can become difficult to ask for help when we need it and to remember or recognize that we are not alone in those feelings. When we become bogged down by such feelings and begin to think that we are struggling with our mental health or we notice this in family or friends, there are certain steps we can take to #GetReal about how to help.

Last week was the Canadian Mental Health Association’s Mental Health Week. The theme and focus this year is empathy. Empathy is an important tool that allows us to connect as human beings. Understanding empathy, and indeed being empathetic, is a step toward eradicating isolation and loneliness. The last two years have brought both of these things to the forefront and made many of us acutely aware of how devastating they can be.

Like most things, empathy is a practice. We can make conscious choices to be more aware of others and what they are experiencing within their own frame of reference.

One thing we can do to increase empathy is to tune in to one another. This is simply the act of remaining present and aware of others and their possible struggles. We must also look inward. If we are in tune with our own thoughts and feelings and sensitive to our own mental well-being, it becomes clearer and easier to relate to others.

We must understand other people’s feelings and meet them where they are. It is important to see the world from their perspective.

Finally, we must choose not to judge. This can sometimes be the most difficult and certainly requires the most practice. It is hard not to pile on our own opinions and preconceived notions when dealing with someone who is struggling. We must also not sit in such harsh judgment of ourselves. We deserve the same courtesy we might offer to others.

Honourable senators, I ask you to consider these points and, particularly in our line of work, to lead with empathy. I believe if we each put this into practice, we would see a marked difference in the world around us.

I would like to highlight the work being done by the Senate Mental Health Advisory Committee. The changes that we make to protect our own mental well-being and that of others can only make our Senate community stronger and a better place to work.

Honourable senators, let’s look after ourselves and each other. While Mental Health Week is one week out of the year, we can and must do the work each and every day. Thank you.

[Translation]

Hon. Éric Forest: Honourable senators, I have the honour to table, in both official languages, the report of the Assemblée parlementaire de la Francophonie concerning the Fortieth Ministerial Conference of the Francophonie and Working Meetings, held in Paris, France, from March 14 to 18, 2022.

Hon. Michèle Audette: Esteemed colleagues, I would like to thank the Anishinaabe Nation for allowing me here on its territory.

Today, in honour of Moose Hide Campaign Day, some beautiful little square pins were distributed for you to wear. You look wonderful, thank you.

This campaign is about ending violence against women and girls. For the colleagues who are joining us remotely, don’t worry, we have some for you, too.

I also want to thank all the campaign organizers for these pins and for all the information on their website.

This beautiful story began in 2011, when Raven Lacerte and her father, Paul, came up with the idea for a campaign while hunting on their ancestral land. After harvesting a moose, they decided to tan the hide and cut it into small squares to inspire change. The Moose Hide Campaign was born: a grassroots movement of Indigenous men and boys committed to ending violence against Indigenous women and girls.

Today, this movement embraces everyone, men and women across Canada, in a bid to end violence against women, girls and their families.

Unfortunately, COVID-19 exacerbated family violence situations in 2020 because of financial stress, lockdowns and limited social contacts. According to federal government surveys, in March and April of 2020 and 2021, the rate of gender-based and family violence rose between 20% and 30% in some parts of the country. These numbers underscore just how important it is to condemn violence against women and girls.

I would like to invite schools, teachers and everyone to visit the Moose Hide Campaign website because it contains a lot of information and plenty of ideas and resources for those wishing to participate in the movement.

Let us join the movement, join the dance known in my Innu language as the makusham, to help end violence, create safe and secure spaces, and, of course, support reconciliation.

The campaign enables participants to respond to several calls to action, including the call to action of the Truth and Reconciliation Commission and the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples. It’s also an opportunity to speak out against the tragic reality of missing and murdered Indigenous women and girls in Canada. This is a response to the calls for justice 1.8 and 1.9 issued by the National Inquiry into Missing and Murdered Indigenous Women and Girls.

We can get a lot done when we work together. We have the power to change things and do great things.

I would like to say tshinashkumitnau for wearing your pin.

[English]

Hon. Percy Mockler: Honourable senators, with leave of the Senate and notwithstanding rule 5-5(a), I move:

That the Standing Senate Committee on National Finance be authorized to meet on Tuesday, May 31, 2022, at 4 p.m., for the purpose of its study of Bill C-8, An Act to implement certain provisions of the economic and fiscal update tabled in Parliament on December 14, 2021 and other measures, even though the Senate may then be sitting, and that rule 12-18(1) be suspended in relation thereto.

The Hon. the Speaker pro tempore: Is leave granted, honourable senators?

Hon. Marc Gold (Government Representative in the Senate): Thank you for the question. I will try to be brief.

The government introduced back-to-work legislation because it was persuaded that the immediate and long-term impact on the Canadian economy caused by the prolongation of this strike in the Port of Montreal was sufficiently serious to justify the legislation. The government took great care in the legislation to make sure that it complied with the highest jurisprudential standards as set out by our courts to find the right balance between the right to strike, which is a constitutionally respected right, and the processes for resolving disputes.

That’s why the legislation included what is called in the business an “escalator clause,” which is mediation, arbitration and the like. So it is not that the government believed it was a Charter-free exercise but rather that it was a Charter-compliant exercise. Here in the chamber, we came to that conclusion after appropriate debate. As I said, the courts are there to review our decision, and we await those results.

Hon. Tony Loffreda: Honourable senators, my question is for the Government Representative in the Senate.

Senator Gold, I would like to address the lacklustre performance of our Canadian pension funds in investing in homegrown talent and businesses. Thanks to research conducted by the global investment management firm Letko Brosseau, I was recently made aware of the fact that in 1990 Canadian-listed companies and equities accounted for nearly 80% of Canada pension fund equity investments. By 2020, this proportion had fallen to only 10%. Our colleague Senator Gignac recently came out publicly on this issue, and I support his views on the matter.

This is a concerning trend that deserves some attention. If pension funds were to inject billions of dollars into Canadian companies at a greater rate, it would have the potential of increasing productivity and growth, accelerating technology, fuelling competition, attracting further investments and, perhaps more importantly, help raise the standard of living of Canadians.

Is the government aware of the current situation, and has it engaged with Canada’s major pension funds to find ways to increase private capital investments at home without necessarily regulating free enterprise?

Hon. Marc Gold (Government Representative in the Senate): Thank you for the question. The Canada Pension Plan Investment Board, or CPPIB, is an independent body that makes its own investment decisions. The CPPIB operates at arm’s length from both federal and provincial governments and has a mandate to invest Canada Pension Plan funds in the best interests of the 20 million Canadians who contribute and benefit from that plan. Importantly, as affirmed in the board’s 2019-20 report, the Canada Pension Plan remains secure, and the resilience of the fund should give Canadians confidence. The plan continues to meet its performance objectives and provides a foundation for retirement for Canadians, even in these times of unprecedented uncertainty.

Senator Loffreda: I would like to pursue this further. I really think the government needs to properly assess the situation, find out why Canadian pension funds are reluctant to invest and what winning policies can be implemented while respecting the idea of free markets. What tool does the government have to further incentivize pension funds to invest in made-in-Canada businesses? Is the government considering making changes to the regulatory landscape that private pension funds must adhere to?

Hon. Brian Francis: Honourable senators, this question is for Senator Gold. Analysis from The Canadian Press shows that a disproportionate number of First Nations people who received the Canada Emergency Response Benefit got letters from the Canada Revenue Agency questioning their eligibility and warning that they may have to pay some of the money back. Some of the applicants worked on-reserve during the pandemic and earned tax-exempt employment income under section 87 of the Indian Act. As you know, First Nations experienced the highest low-income rates in the country due to overrepresentation in precarious and low-wage employment, and this population was hardest hit during the pandemic. Many are still struggling to meet their basic needs.

Senator Gold, back in 2020, the federal government acknowledged that unclear messaging on the eligibility requirements contributed to widespread confusion. Why is the federal government allocating so many resources to tracking and penalizing First Nations who face high levels of poverty, homelessness and other inequities rather than assuming responsibility for administrative errors?

Senator Plett: I think you said the RCMP had also been involved. Leader, by now, I’m sure you are aware of an exchange between our colleague Senator White and Commissioner Brenda Lucki of the RCMP that took place in the Special Joint Committee on the Declaration of Emergency. Senator White asked:

As a law enforcement agency with primacy for national security, did you ask the government or representatives for the invocation of the Emergencies Act?

Commissioner Lucki responded:

No, there was never a question of requesting the Emergencies Act.

Senator White said:

So you never asked for it. Do you know of any other police leadership who asked specifically the government for the invocation?

Commissioner Lucki responded, “No.”

Public Safety Minister Marco Mendicino said, in defending his government’s invocation of the act, “We invoked the act because it was the advice of non-partisan professional law enforcement . . . .”

Who, leader, is correct? The Minister of Public Safety or the Commissioner of the RCMP? They cannot both be correct, Senator Gold.

Hon. Pamela Wallin: Honourable senators, my question is for Senator Gold. More than a year ago, the government rejected an amendment passed by the Senate to allow for advanced requests for medical assistance in dying but then promised there would be significant consultations and study of the issue. The election brought those meetings to a halt, and then there was another five-month delay in getting the committee up and running again. The committee has held just two meetings on advanced requests with no intention to review it further before its report this fall.

Senator Gold, our mandate requires us to conduct:

. . . significant consultations and study, including a careful examination of the safeguards for persons preparing advance request and safeguards for practitioners administering medical assistance in dying . . . .

Do you believe these two meetings meet the requirements set out by that mandate?

Hon. Stan Kutcher: Honourable senators, my question is for Senator Gold.

Since Canada launched the Canada-Ukraine Authorization for Emergency Travel program, over 200,000 displaced Ukrainians have applied for entry to Canada, about 90,000 applications have been approved and about 500 arrive daily. I am concerned that post-arrival success for those who are making their way here may be jeopardized by inadequate support provided to them after they arrive.

Specifically, I am concerned about three issues. First, the cost of medical examinations is about $450 per adult, quite the amount for a person fleeing their home with not much more than they can carry. Without this examination, they cannot apply for a work permit. Second, currently, displaced Ukrainians arriving with children do not have immediate access to the Canada Child Benefit, which is available to other refugee populations. And finally, it is still unclear what the federal income support that the Prime Minister announced on April 9, 2022, will actually be, both in amount and duration.

What is the federal government doing to address these time-sensitive financial issues, and when will they be doing this?

Hon. Marc Gold (Government Representative in the Senate): Thank you, senator, for the question.

I have been advised that with regard to medical examinations, they are required in limited circumstances and are specific to the professions that are higher risk, such as in health care and those that require close contact with the public.

As senators know, the resettlement efforts to welcome Ukrainians differ from refugee resettlement efforts. Refugee resettlements are best suited for protracted situations where there is an agency infrastructure set up, and where no other durable, long-term solutions for safety and a return home exist.

The Canada-Ukraine Authorization for Emergency Travel, or CUAET, was designed to respond quickly, and it provides for targeted support and response to the needs communicated, notably, by the Ukrainian nationals, who are not ready to make long-term decisions about their futures.

Recently, I’ve been advised that the minister announced a series of measures to make it easier to support Ukrainians, such as providing short-term income support to ensure basic needs are met, and I am advised that details will be provided shortly.

Working with its provincial and territorial partners, with the Ukrainian-Canadian community, the business community and settlement organizations across the country, the government will make sure that everyone arriving under the Canada-Ukraine Authorization for Emergency Travel program has access to the services that they need.

Hon. Dennis Glen Patterson: Honourable senators, I rise today to speak to Bill S-203, An Act respecting a federal framework on autism spectrum disorder.

I’d like to begin today by telling senators the story of William McLaren. I am thankful to his mom, Claudine, who works for me as my director of parliamentary affairs, for giving me permission to share this with you all.

Will was born fully blind due to a relatively rare diagnosis that is not preventable and very hard to detect. Basically, his optic nerves and the part of his brain that they would connect to did not fully form.

As a result of his blindness, Will was followed by many different services at the Ottawa Children’s Treatment Centre and it was there, at the age of 4, that it was first suggested Will might be autistic. However, it’s hard to make a diagnosis at such an early age. It also requires a certain expertise to make such a diagnosis in a blind child because so-called blindisms are very similar to indicators of autism such as texture aversions, not making eye contact when you speak to others, and getting overstimulated easily.

His parents decided to wait until he was older to explore the potential autism further but were hyper-aware of potential indicators and were able to work autism-intervention strategies into their son’s individual education plan, or IEP.

Later, at the age of 7, it became apparent that it was time to revisit this possibility. The wait time, however, for a free assessment by the school board was years long and there was no expertise within the school board to make a diagnosis of a blind child. Thankfully, Will’s parents were fortunate enough to have the resources to find a private psychologist who was able to diagnose him.

Even so, with COVID restrictions for external professionals entering schools, the assessment has taken over a year to complete and cost $2,500. While they are still awaiting the final assessment report, they and the school have been told to proceed with an unofficial diagnosis until all the paperwork could be completed. Thanks to the excellent support of his teachers, education assistants, principal and vice principal at Carleton Heights Public School, he has been able to flourish.

Colleagues, this story is significant because, while it is a good news story for Will, there are many instances where this story could have taken a tragic turn for many others. It’s possible that parents would not have received any early indication of autism and not known what to look out for as their child grew and developed. Parents may not have had the advocacy skills required to put in place a comprehensive IEP or may have faced resistance within the school to implementing autism intervention strategies ahead of a final diagnosis.

Other potential barriers to accessing services include the $2,500 private assessment fee, which may have prevented many families from jumping the long queue to access services. Geographical considerations may have limited the amount, type or quality of services available. This is particularly true for families with children who are multiply involved, that is, who have two or more diagnoses, because they would often require access to specialized services and professionals.

What Bill S-203 would do is require the government to create a national framework on autism spectrum disorder based on consultations with various stakeholders. While the bill lists several points for inclusion in the framework and outlines many of the stakeholders that should be included in the consultation process, it is important to note that amendments I proposed, and that were subsequently accepted, clearly noted that these lists under clauses 2 and 3 are not exhaustive. I agree with Senator Housakos’ approach of not being overly prescriptive so that the minister has flexibility to decide what issues and which stakeholders should be included.

I feel it important to underscore the fact that this is not the framework, this is the mechanism to create it. The bill also sets out accountability measures to ensure that the framework is created within 18 months of Royal Assent. It also requires a review after five years of that framework being tabled to study the efficacy of those measures that had been implemented and to get a response as to why other measures may not have been implemented since the framework’s tabling.

It is my hope that senators see the importance of this bill and the need to move it through our chamber expeditiously so that we can make this a law and begin the hard work of addressing the gaps and barriers that families and neurodivergent persons face every day, as I have described in Will’s case.

We heard in committee how previous attempts to create a similar framework have failed, so I want to congratulate Senator Housakos as sponsor and Senator Loffreda who, though given the title of critic, has been very supportive of this bill. I know that this topic is personal for many senators in this chamber and it is my sincere hope that this bill will succeed where many other efforts have failed. The next step to that goal is passing this bill in our chamber — hopefully today.

Thank you, honourable senators. Qujannamiik.

Hon. Tony Loffreda: Honourable senators, I rise today at third reading to speak to Bill S-203, an Act respecting a federal framework on autism spectrum disorder.

At the outset, I want to thank our colleagues who spoke to the bill and those who participated in the hearings of the Standing Senate Committee on Social Affairs, Science and Technology. While I am not a member of the committee, I made sure to attend the meetings. I want to extend my thanks to Senator Omidvar for the way she skilfully presided over the meetings and dealt with the bill. I appreciated her detailed account of the work of the committee in her remarks at the report stage last week. I also want to thank all the witnesses who appeared before the committee and whose testimony was very compelling and insightful. I think it’s fair to say that there is general support for this bill.

[Translation]

When I rose at second reading as a friendly critic of this bill, I expressed my long-standing commitment to the autism community in Montreal and elsewhere.

Senator Housakos and I worked on some community initiatives that would provide adequate, affordable and tailored programs and services to people with autism spectrum disorder, or ASD. One example is Giant Steps, a school in Montreal.

I don’t want to repeat everything that our colleagues have already said, so I simply want to say a few words about how urgently the autism community in Canada needs this bill to be passed. We must make it abundantly clear to this community that the Senate of Canada is an ally and wants to pass legislation that will compel the government to establish a national framework on autism.

Esteemed colleagues, this bill is relatively simple. It would enable the federal minister of health to establish a federal framework on autism spectrum disorder, in consultation and partnership with other ministers, with the provinces and with stakeholders.

[English]

It’s clear to me that the autistic community in all its diversity — patients, families, caregivers and supporters — is at the heart of this bill and the implementation of a national framework, and Senator Housakos made that clear to us both in this chamber and in committee.

To be certain, the Social Affairs Committee amended the bill to make sure — in case it wasn’t already — that the definition of “relevant stakeholders” in the section of the bill that deals with government consultation includes self-advocates, persons with lived experience, including caregivers and support persons, service providers, representatives from the medical and research communities and from organizations that focus on autism spectrum disorder in Indigenous communities.

I also welcomed the committee’s amendment to clause 2(2)(d), which shifts the focus from establishing a national public awareness campaign to national campaigns to enhance public knowledge, understanding and acceptance of autism spectrum disorder, while accounting for intersectionality in order to foster inclusivity. Witnesses called for this amendment. During committee hearings, Jonathan Lai, Executive Director of the Canadian Autism Spectrum Disorder Alliance was clear about it. He told the committee:

For instance, for one of the clauses, one of our suggested amendments would be to replace the word “awareness” with “acceptance” regarding a national public campaign. We’re not looking for awareness about a disorder but about acceptance for people, to have more a human-rights-based lens on that and to prioritize the social and economic inclusion of autistic Canadians and their families.

He continued:

We have to move away from that awareness culture around an impairment to an acceptance of people and to actions that would lead to a more inclusive society with the supports available so that everybody can participate more fully.

Senators will remember that the government has also been engaged in consultations on establishing a national autism strategy. There was some discussion on this matter in committee and whether Bill S-203 was duplicative. I don’t want to dwell on that matter, but allow me to quote the sponsor of the bill in committee who reminded us that an autism framework, which is what Bill S-203 seeks to implement:

. . . will serve as a fantastic springboard into that strategy because you will have a much broader range of discussion and consultation with stakeholders who will be around the table making their asks when you’re negotiating and building the framework.

This message was echoed by Dr. Jean-François Lemay from the Alberta Children’s Hospital who also believes that:

This bill will serve as a springboard to help create the space to codesign and develop new, innovative solutions leveraging Canadian and international knowledge.

Our esteemed colleague Senator Boehm, during his speech at second reading, also argued that:

. . . the appeal of the bill is that it is general, recognizing that there are jurisdictional issues and varying approaches in dealing with ASD across the country. Hence it is a framework within which a national autism strategy could be created.

In fact, Senator Boehm may recall that, just a few weeks ago, when the Public Health Agency of Canada appeared before our National Finance Committee, I asked officials from the agency to provide us with an update on the development of the strategy. In a written response received on May 4, the agency explained that it received $15.4 million over two years in Budget 2021 to support its work in the development of the strategy. The agency provided us with several key milestones that have been achieved in recent months.

We were told that there has been engagement with provinces and territories through a new federal-provincial-territorial working group on autism, along with Indigenous engagement. We were also reminded that the Canadian Academy of Health Sciences is consulting broadly and just released its comprehensive assessment report on autism two days ago. A national conference to build consensus on the priorities for action is scheduled to take place on November 15 and 16, 2022. Finally, the public release and implementation of a national autism strategy are scheduled for the spring or summer of 2023. This is encouraging news.

However, what differentiates the strategy from the framework being proposed in Bill S-203 is that this bill compels the government — by law — to develop a national framework. The national strategy is a policy decision, not a legislative requirement. If enacted, Bill S-203 would make sure we hold the government to account. It forces the minister to table a report in both houses of Parliament setting out the federal framework, and ensures a review and assessment of the framework within the first five years.

Honourable senators, this bill is a good one, and I thank Senator Housakos for bringing it forward. The committee did great work and made changes that strengthen the bill, and I think it’s time for the Senate to unanimously adopt this bill today.

Together, we could send a strong and united message to the autism community that we stand behind them as we put pressure on the government to develop and implement this national framework. This bill gives the government a pretty good road map to consult widely and address an array of issues without being too prescriptive.

Once implemented, I have no doubt this bill will find innovative solutions to unique problems and inadequacies in the ways we support — socially, financially, culturally and otherwise — individuals living with autism. It will also help reduce barriers and provide greater opportunities for autistic individuals to grow, prosper and contribute to our society and economy.

After all, let us not forget who this bill is for. It’s for all individuals who are on the autism spectrum disorder, their families, their caregivers, their advocates and all those who play a role, big or small, within the ASD community. Let’s pass this bill for them.

Thank you very much.