Speech (House debate)

{
    "time": "2020-11-27 10:05:00",
    "attribution": {
        "en": "Mr. Michael Cooper (St. Albert\u2014Edmonton, CPC)",
        "fr": "M. Michael Cooper (St. Albert\u2014Edmonton, PCC)"
    },
    "content": {
        "en": "<p class=\"procedural\" data-HoCid=\"6384742\"> moved:</p>\n<blockquote><p data-HoCid=\"6384743\" data-originallang=\"en\"> Motion No. 2 </p>\n<p data-HoCid=\"6384744\" data-originallang=\"en\"> That Bill C-7, in Clause 1, be amended by deleting lines 25 to 31 on page 3. </p>\n<p data-HoCid=\"6384745\" data-originallang=\"en\"> Motion No. 3 </p>\n<p data-HoCid=\"6384746\" data-originallang=\"en\"> That Bill C-7, in Clause 1, be amended by replacing line 8 on page 5 with the following: </p>\n<p data-HoCid=\"6384747\" data-originallang=\"en\"> \u201c(i) ensure that there are at least 120 clear days between\u201d. </p>\n</blockquote><p data-HoCid=\"6384748\" data-originallang=\"en\">Madam Speaker, I am pleased to rise to speak at report stage of Bill <a data-HoCid=\"10875380\" href=\"/bills/43-2/C-7/\" title=\"An Act to amend the Criminal Code (medical assistance in dying)\">C-7</a> and, in particular, with respect to the two very modest amendments that we in the official opposition have put forward to the legislation, namely, to maintain a 10-day reflection period and to extend the reflection period of 90 days to 100 days where death is not reasonably foreseeable. Both of these amendments are supported by the evidence that was heard at the justice committee in what was otherwise a very rushed process. It need not have been this way and it should not have been this way. </p>\n<p data-HoCid=\"6384749\" data-originallang=\"en\">One year ago, the Attorney General should have done what we on this side of the House called on the Attorney General to do, and that was to appeal the Truchon decision. That would have provided clarity in the law and it would have provided Parliament with time to appropriately respond legislatively if necessary, but the Attorney General did not do that. Instead, he rushed ahead with legislation purportedly aimed at responding to the Truchon decision, legislation, I might add, that was introduced with very little consultation.</p>\n<p data-HoCid=\"6384750\" data-originallang=\"en\">The legislation went well beyond responding to the Truchon decision. The legislation fundamentally changes the medical assistance in dying regime that was passed in this Parliament a mere four and a half years ago and in so doing, the Attorney General and the government pre-empted a legislative review that was mandated by Bill <a data-HoCid=\"8177165\" href=\"/bills/42-1/C-14/\" title=\"An Act to amend the Criminal Code and to make related amendments to other Acts (medical assistance in dying)\">C-14</a>.</p>\n<p data-HoCid=\"6384751\" data-originallang=\"en\">As a result, what we have is a rushed process to deal with a shoddy piece of legislation that recklessly puts vulnerable Canadians at risk. It is why virtually every disability rights organization in Canada opposes this bill. Indeed, 72 national disability rights organizations wrote to the Attorney General and pleaded with him to appeal the Truchon decision. Those pleas fell on deaf ears.</p>\n<p data-HoCid=\"6384752\" data-originallang=\"en\">More than 1,000 physicians have penned a letter to the Attorney General opposing this bill. The UN Special Rapporteur on the rights of persons with disabilities expressed concern about Canada's medical assistance in dying regime and questioned whether Canada in fact was living up to its international obligations under the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities.</p>\n<p data-HoCid=\"6384753\" data-originallang=\"en\">I will quote Krista Carr, the executive vice-president of Inclusion Canada, an organization that represents the rights of persons with disabilities, who said this of Bill <a data-HoCid=\"10875380\" href=\"/bills/43-2/C-7/\" title=\"An Act to amend the Criminal Code (medical assistance in dying)\">C-7</a>, \u201cBill C-7 is our worst nightmare.\u201d</p>\n<p data-HoCid=\"6384754\" data-originallang=\"en\">Catherine Frazee, professor at Ryerson University, former chief commissioner of the Ontario Human Rights Commission and a leading advocate for the rights of persons with disabilities, said \u201cour equality is, right now, on the line\u201d with respect to Bill <a data-HoCid=\"10875380\" href=\"/bills/43-2/C-7/\" title=\"An Act to amend the Criminal Code (medical assistance in dying)\">C-7</a>. She noted that the careful balance between individual autonomy and equality carved out in Bill <a data-HoCid=\"8177165\" href=\"/bills/42-1/C-14/\" title=\"An Act to amend the Criminal Code and to make related amendments to other Acts (medical assistance in dying)\">C-14</a> had been upended in Bill C-7.</p>\n<p data-HoCid=\"6384755\" data-originallang=\"en\">Dr. Heidi Janz of the Council of Canadians with Disabilities said:</p>\n<blockquote><p data-HoCid=\"6384756\" data-originallang=\"en\"> Bill C-7 would enshrine a legal form of ableism into Canadian law by making medical assistance in dying a legally sanctioned substitute for the provision of community-based supports to assist people with disabilities to live. </p>\n<p data-HoCid=\"6384757\" data-originallang=\"en\"> You must ensure that MAID does not weaponize systemic ableism in Canada. </p>\n</blockquote><p data-HoCid=\"6384758\" data-originallang=\"en\">In the face of those concerns right across the spectrum from physicians and experts to persons with disabilities and their advocates, we, on this side, thought it appropriate we proceed in a cautious and deliberate way, having regard for the complexity of the issue, the lack of consultation and the very short time frame before us to consider the radical changes brought forward by the government in Bill <a data-HoCid=\"10875380\" href=\"/bills/43-2/C-7/\" title=\"An Act to amend the Criminal Code (medical assistance in dying)\">C-7</a>.</p>\n<p data-HoCid=\"6384759\" data-originallang=\"en\">Therefore, at the Standing Committee on Justice and Human Rights we put forward reasonable amendments, including maintaining a 10-day reflection period, having regard for the fact that people do change their minds and having regard for the feedback that was provided.</p>\n<p data-HoCid=\"6384760\" data-originallang=\"en\">We put forward an amendment to ensure there be two independent witnesses. When one executes a will, one needs two witnesses. One would expect that at the very least there would be a safeguard at least as robust as in the case of executing a will when we are talking about ending one's life, but no, the government removed that safeguard.</p>\n<p data-HoCid=\"6384761\" data-originallang=\"en\">We put forward an amendment to extend the reflection period where death is not reasonably foreseeable from 90 days to 120 days, having regard for the fact it is often not even possible to access palliative care or other supports within 90 days. What good is a reflection period of 90 days if one does not have access to alternatives within such a time frame? That amendment was rejected by the government.</p>\n<p data-HoCid=\"6384762\" data-originallang=\"en\">Consistent with what the <a data-HoCid=\"253403\" href=\"/politicians/carla-qualtrough/\" title=\"Carla Qualtrough\">Minister of Disability Inclusion</a> said, and having regard for the horrific evidence we heard of Roger Foley, who was coerced into making a request for medical assistance in dying, which he recorded, this should always be patient-initiated so coercion is limited and to guard against that.</p>\n<p data-HoCid=\"6384763\" data-originallang=\"en\">In closing, let me just say that what we have is a piece of legislation that does the opposite of what the Supreme Court called on Parliament to do in Carter, namely, to provide for a carefully designed and monitored system of safeguards. This legislation eviscerates those safeguards, and on that basis, is unsupportable. It needs to be defeated out of hand.</p>",
        "fr": "<p data-HoCid=\"6384742\" data-originallang=\"en\"> propose:</p>\n<blockquote><p data-HoCid=\"6384743\" data-originallang=\"en\"> Motion n<sup>o</sup> 2 </p>\n<p data-HoCid=\"6384744\" data-originallang=\"en\"> Que le projet de loi C-7, \u00e0 l'article 1, soit modifi\u00e9 par suppression des lignes 22 \u00e0 28, page 3. </p>\n<p data-HoCid=\"6384745\" data-originallang=\"en\"> Motion n<sup>o</sup> 3 </p>\n<p data-HoCid=\"6384746\" data-originallang=\"en\"> Que le projet de loi C-7, \u00e0 l'article 1, soit modifi\u00e9 par substitution, \u00e0 la ligne 6, page 5, de ce qui suit: </p>\n<p data-HoCid=\"6384747\" data-originallang=\"en\"> \u00ab i) s\u2019assurer qu\u2019au moins cent vingt jours francs \u00bb. </p>\n</blockquote><p data-HoCid=\"6384748\" data-originallang=\"en\">\u2014 Madame la Pr\u00e9sidente, c'est un plaisir pour moi de pouvoir parler du projet de loi <a data-HoCid=\"10875380\" href=\"/bills/43-2/C-7/\" title=\"An Act to amend the Criminal Code (medical assistance in dying)\">C-7</a> \u00e0 l'\u00e9tape du rapport, et plus particuli\u00e8rement des deux tr\u00e8s modestes amendements que propose l'opposition officielle. Ces deux amendements, qui auraient pour but de maintenir la p\u00e9riode de r\u00e9flexion de 10 jours et de faire passer de 90 \u00e0 100 jours la p\u00e9riode de r\u00e9flexion pour les cas o\u00f9 la mort n'est pas raisonnablement pr\u00e9visible, sont l'\u00e9cho des t\u00e9moignages entendus au comit\u00e9 de la justice, m\u00eame si force est d'avouer que l'\u00e9tude s'est faite de mani\u00e8re tr\u00e8s pr\u00e9cipit\u00e9e. Les choses auraient tr\u00e8s bien pu \u2014 et d\u00fb \u2014 se passer autrement.</p>\n<p data-HoCid=\"6384749\" data-originallang=\"en\">L'ann\u00e9e derni\u00e8re, le procureur g\u00e9n\u00e9ral aurait d\u00fb faire ce que l'opposition lui demandait de faire et interjeter appel de la d\u00e9cision Truchon. La loi n'en aurait \u00e9t\u00e9 que plus claire, et si le Parlement s'\u00e9tait trouv\u00e9 dans l'obligation de l\u00e9gif\u00e9rer, il aurait eu le temps de le faire sans se presser. Ce n'est h\u00e9las pas ce que le procureur g\u00e9n\u00e9ral a d\u00e9cid\u00e9 de faire. Il s'est plut\u00f4t empress\u00e9 de pr\u00e9senter un projet de loi cens\u00e9 donner suite au jugement Truchon \u2014 lequel projet de loi, disons-le, n'a \u00e9t\u00e9 pr\u00e9c\u00e9d\u00e9 d'\u00e0 peu pr\u00e8s aucune consultation.</p>\n<p data-HoCid=\"6384750\" data-originallang=\"en\">La mesure l\u00e9gislative ne se contente pas de donner suite \u00e0 l'arr\u00eat Truchon, loin s'en faut. Elle modifie fondamentalement le r\u00e9gime d'aide m\u00e9dicale \u00e0 mourir adopt\u00e9 au Parlement il y a \u00e0 peine quatre ans et demi, et, ce faisant, le procureur g\u00e9n\u00e9ral et le gouvernement ont emp\u00each\u00e9 l'examen l\u00e9gislatif pr\u00e9vu par le projet de loi <a data-HoCid=\"8177165\" href=\"/bills/42-1/C-14/\" title=\"An Act to amend the Criminal Code and to make related amendments to other Acts (medical assistance in dying)\">C-14</a>.</p>\n<p data-HoCid=\"6384751\" data-originallang=\"en\">En cons\u00e9quence, nous devons examiner de fa\u00e7on pr\u00e9cipit\u00e9e une mesure l\u00e9gislative b\u00e2cl\u00e9e qui, de fa\u00e7on inconsid\u00e9r\u00e9e, met en danger les Canadiens vuln\u00e9rables. C'est pourquoi pratiquement tous les organismes de d\u00e9fense des droits des personnes handicap\u00e9es au Canada s'opposent au projet de loi. En effet, 72 organismes nationaux de d\u00e9fense des droits des personnes handicap\u00e9es ont \u00e9crit au procureur g\u00e9n\u00e9ral pour l'exhorter \u00e0 faire appel de l'arr\u00eat Truchon. Leurs demandes sont rest\u00e9es lettre morte.</p>\n<p data-HoCid=\"6384752\" data-originallang=\"en\">Plus de 1 000 m\u00e9decins ont fait parvenir une lettre au procureur g\u00e9n\u00e9ral pour lui signifier leur opposition au projet de loi. Le rapporteur sp\u00e9cial des Nations unies sur les droits des personnes handicap\u00e9es a exprim\u00e9 des inqui\u00e9tudes au sujet du r\u00e9gime canadien d'aide m\u00e9dicale \u00e0 mourir et il s'est demand\u00e9 si le Canada respectait vraiment ses obligations internationales au titre de la Convention relative aux droits des personnes handicap\u00e9es.</p>\n<p data-HoCid=\"6384753\" data-originallang=\"en\">Je vais citer Krista Carr, vice-pr\u00e9sidente \u00e0 la direction d'Inclusion Canada, un organisme de d\u00e9fense des droits des personnes handicap\u00e9es, qui a d\u00e9clar\u00e9 ceci au sujet du projet de loi <a data-HoCid=\"10875380\" href=\"/bills/43-2/C-7/\" title=\"An Act to amend the Criminal Code (medical assistance in dying)\">C-7</a>: \u00ab Le projet de loi C-7 est notre pire cauchemar. \u00bb</p>\n<p data-HoCid=\"6384754\" data-originallang=\"en\">Catherine Frazee, professeure \u00e0 l'Universit\u00e9 Ryerson, ancienne commissaire en chef de la Commission ontarienne des droits de la personne et ardente d\u00e9fenseure des droits des personnes handicap\u00e9es, a d\u00e9clar\u00e9 que leur droit \u00e0 l'\u00e9galit\u00e9 \u00e9tait maintenant en jeu avec le projet de loi <a data-HoCid=\"10875380\" href=\"/bills/43-2/C-7/\" title=\"An Act to amend the Criminal Code (medical assistance in dying)\">C-7</a>. Elle fait remarquer que l'\u00e9quilibre d\u00e9licat entre l'autonomie individuelle et l'\u00e9galit\u00e9, dont il est question dans le projet de loi <a data-HoCid=\"8177165\" href=\"/bills/42-1/C-14/\" title=\"An Act to amend the Criminal Code and to make related amendments to other Acts (medical assistance in dying)\">C-14</a>, a \u00e9t\u00e9 boulevers\u00e9 par le projet de loi C-7.</p>\n<p data-HoCid=\"6384755\" data-originallang=\"en\"> La Dre Heidi Janz du Conseil des Canadiens avec d\u00e9ficiences a d\u00e9clar\u00e9:</p>\n<blockquote><p data-HoCid=\"6384756\" data-originallang=\"en\"> Le projet de loi C-7 inscrirait dans la loi canadienne une forme l\u00e9gale de capacitisme en faisant de l'aide m\u00e9dicale \u00e0 mourir un substitut l\u00e9galement sanctionn\u00e9 \u00e0 la prestation de services de soutien communautaire pour aider les personnes handicap\u00e9es \u00e0 vivre. </p>\n<p data-HoCid=\"6384757\" data-originallang=\"en\"> Vous devez vous assurer que l'aide m\u00e9dicale \u00e0 mourir ne transforme pas le capacitisme syst\u00e9mique en arme au Canada. </p>\n</blockquote><p data-HoCid=\"6384758\" data-originallang=\"en\">\u00c0 la lumi\u00e8re de ces pr\u00e9occupations exprim\u00e9es par des m\u00e9decins, des experts, des personnes handicap\u00e9es et leurs d\u00e9fenseurs, nous avons pens\u00e9, de ce c\u00f4t\u00e9 de la Chambre, qu'il serait appropri\u00e9 de proc\u00e9der de fa\u00e7on prudente et r\u00e9fl\u00e9chie, en tenant compte de la complexit\u00e9 de la question, du manque de consultation et du peu de temps qui nous est allou\u00e9 pour soupeser les changements radicaux propos\u00e9s par le gouvernement dans le cadre du projet de loi <a data-HoCid=\"10875380\" href=\"/bills/43-2/C-7/\" title=\"An Act to amend the Criminal Code (medical assistance in dying)\">C-7</a>.</p>\n<p data-HoCid=\"6384759\" data-originallang=\"en\">Par cons\u00e9quent, au Comit\u00e9 permanent de la justice et des droits de la personne, nous avons propos\u00e9 des amendements raisonnables, visant notamment \u00e0 maintenir en place la p\u00e9riode de r\u00e9flexion de 10 jours, de mani\u00e8re \u00e0 tenir compte du fait qu'il arrive que les gens changent d'id\u00e9e ainsi que de la r\u00e9troaction fournie.</p>\n<p data-HoCid=\"6384760\" data-originallang=\"en\">Nous avons propos\u00e9 un amendement visant \u00e0 exiger la pr\u00e9sence de deux t\u00e9moins ind\u00e9pendants. Lorsqu'une personne ex\u00e9cute un testament, il lui faut deux t\u00e9moins. On s'attendrait \u00e0 ce qu'il existe une mesure de sauvegarde \u00e0 tout le moins aussi robuste lorsqu'il est question de mettre un terme \u00e0 la vie d'une personne, mais non, le gouvernement a \u00e9limin\u00e9 cette mesure de sauvegarde.</p>\n<p data-HoCid=\"6384761\" data-originallang=\"en\">Nous avons propos\u00e9 un amendement visant \u00e0 porter de 90 \u00e0 120 jours la p\u00e9riode de r\u00e9flexion lorsque la mort n'est pas raisonnablement pr\u00e9visible, de mani\u00e8re \u00e0 tenir compte du fait qu'il n'est souvent m\u00eame pas possible d'acc\u00e9der \u00e0 des soins palliatifs ou \u00e0 d'autres formes de soutien en l'espace de 90 jours. Que vaut une p\u00e9riode de r\u00e9flexion de 90 jours si la personne concern\u00e9e ne dispose pas de solutions de rechange dans ce d\u00e9lai? Le gouvernement a rejet\u00e9 l'amendement.</p>\n<p data-HoCid=\"6384762\" data-originallang=\"en\">Conform\u00e9ment \u00e0 ce qu'a dit la <a data-HoCid=\"253403\" href=\"/politicians/carla-qualtrough/\" title=\"Carla Qualtrough\">ministre de l'Inclusion des personnes handicap\u00e9es</a> et \u00e0 la lumi\u00e8re de l'horrible t\u00e9moignage que nous avons entendu de Roger Foley, que l'on a forc\u00e9 \u00e0 pr\u00e9senter une demande d'aide m\u00e9dicale \u00e0 mourir et qui a enregistr\u00e9 cette conversation, la d\u00e9marche devrait toujours venir d'abord du patient de mani\u00e8re \u00e0 limiter la coercition et \u00e0 en prot\u00e9ger les patients.</p>\n<p data-HoCid=\"6384763\" data-originallang=\"en\">En terminant, je dirai que le projet de loi fait l'oppos\u00e9 de ce que la Cour supr\u00eame a demand\u00e9 au Parlement de faire dans l'arr\u00eat Carter. Plut\u00f4t que de pr\u00e9voir un r\u00e9gime de mesures de sauvegarde con\u00e7u avec soin et \u00e9troitement surveill\u00e9, le projet de loi affaiblit les mesures de sauvegarde. Pour cette raison, je ne peux l'appuyer. Le projet de loi doit carr\u00e9ment \u00eatre rejet\u00e9.</p>"
    },
    "url": "/debates/2020/11/27/michael-cooper-1/",
    "politician_url": "/politicians/michael-cooper/",
    "politician_membership_url": "/politicians/memberships/4382/",
    "procedural": false,
    "source_id": "11044864",
    "h1": {
        "en": "Government Orders",
        "fr": "Ordres \u00e9manant du gouvernement"
    },
    "h2": {
        "en": "Criminal Code",
        "fr": "Le Code criminel"
    },
    "h3": {
        "en": "Motions in amendment",
        "fr": "Motions d'amendement"
    },
    "document_url": "/debates/2020/11/27/",
    "related": {
        "document_speeches_url": "/speeches/?document=%2Fdebates%2F2020%2F11%2F27%2F"
    }
}