But yeah , that 's why I phrased it that way , yeah OK. Um  human subjects approval on campus , uh  and release forms worked out so the meeting participants have a chance to request audio pixelization of selected parts of the spee their speech. Um  audio pixelization software written and tested. Um   preliminary analysis of overlaps in the pilot data we have transcribed , and exploratory analysis of long - distance inferences for topic coherence , that was  I was   wasn't  sure if those were the right way   that was the right way to describe that because of that little exercise that  that you  and  and Lokendra did.

I  well , I I 'm probably saying this wrong , but what I said was exploratory analysis of long - distance inferences  for topic coherence.


I  well , I I 'm probably saying this wrong , but what I said was exploratory analysis of long - distance inferences  for topic coherence.

Something like that. Um  so , uh  I    a lot of that was from , you know , what  what  what you two were doing so I  I sent it to you , and you know , please mail me , you know , the corrections or suggestions for changing


Something like that. Um  so , uh  I    a lot of that was from , you know , what  what  what you two were doing so I  I sent it to you , and you know , please mail me , you know , the corrections or suggestions for changing

I  I don't want to make this twice it 's length but   but you know , just im improve it. Um Is there anything anybody


Something like that. Um  so , uh  I    a lot of that was from , you know , what  what  what you two were doing so I  I sent it to you , and you know , please mail me , you know , the corrections or suggestions for changing

I  I don't want to make this twice it 's length but   but you know , just im improve it. Um Is there anything anybody

I  I did a bunch of stuff for supporting of digits.


I  I don't want to make this twice it 's length but   but you know , just im improve it. Um Is there anything anybody

I  I did a bunch of stuff for supporting of digits.

" Bunch of stuff for s " OK , maybe  maybe send me a sentence that 's a little thought through about that.


I  I don't want to make this twice it 's length but   but you know , just im improve it. Um Is there anything anybody

I  I did a bunch of stuff for supporting of digits.

" Bunch of stuff for s " OK , maybe  maybe send me a sentence that 's a little thought through about that.

So ,  OK , I 'll send you a sentence that doesn't just say " a bunch of " ?


I  I did a bunch of stuff for supporting of digits.

" Bunch of stuff for s " OK , maybe  maybe send me a sentence that 's a little thought through about that.

So ,  OK , I 'll send you a sentence that doesn't just say " a bunch of " ?

" Bunch of stuff " , yeah , " stuff " is probably bad too ,


" Bunch of stuff for s " OK , maybe  maybe send me a sentence that 's a little thought through about that.

So ,  OK , I 'll send you a sentence that doesn't just say " a bunch of " ?

" Bunch of stuff " , yeah , " stuff " is probably bad too ,


So ,  OK , I 'll send you a sentence that doesn't just say " a bunch of " ?

" Bunch of stuff " , yeah , " stuff " is probably bad too ,


" Bunch of stuff " , yeah , " stuff " is probably bad too ,

I 'll try to  phrase it in passive voice.


I 'll try to  phrase it in passive voice.


I 'll try to  phrase it in passive voice.

" range of things " , yeah. Um  and  and you know , I sort of threw in what you did with what Jane did on  in  under the , uh  uh  preliminary analysis of overlaps. Uh  uh  Thilo , can you tell us about all the work you 've done on this project in the last , uh  last three months ?


" range of things " , yeah. Um  and  and you know , I sort of threw in what you did with what Jane did on  in  under the , uh  uh  preliminary analysis of overlaps. Uh  uh  Thilo , can you tell us about all the work you 've done on this project in the last , uh  last three months ?


Um ,  I didn't get it. Wh - what is " audio pixelization " ?


Um ,  I didn't get it. Wh - what is " audio pixelization " ?

Uh , audio pix wh he did it , so why don't you explain it quickly ?


Um ,  I didn't get it. Wh - what is " audio pixelization " ?

Uh , audio pix wh he did it , so why don't you explain it quickly ?

It 's just , uh  beeping out parts that you don't want included in the meeting so , you know you can say things like , " Well , this should probably not be on the record , but beep "


Uh , audio pix wh he did it , so why don't you explain it quickly ?

It 's just , uh  beeping out parts that you don't want included in the meeting so , you know you can say things like , " Well , this should probably not be on the record , but beep "

Yeah. We  we  we spent a  a  a fair amount of time early on just talk dealing with this issue about op w e e  we realized , " well , people are speaking in an impromptu way and they might say something that would embarrass them or others later " , and , how do you get around that


It 's just , uh  beeping out parts that you don't want included in the meeting so , you know you can say things like , " Well , this should probably not be on the record , but beep "

Yeah. We  we  we spent a  a  a fair amount of time early on just talk dealing with this issue about op w e e  we realized , " well , people are speaking in an impromptu way and they might say something that would embarrass them or others later " , and , how do you get around that


Yeah. We  we  we spent a  a  a fair amount of time early on just talk dealing with this issue about op w e e  we realized , " well , people are speaking in an impromptu way and they might say something that would embarrass them or others later " , and , how do you get around that

so in the consent form it says , well you  we will look at the transcripts later and if there 's something that you 're  unhappy with , yeah.


so in the consent form it says , well you  we will look at the transcripts later and if there 's something that you 're  unhappy with , yeah.

But you don't want to just totally excise it because um uh , well you have to be careful about excising it , how  how you excise it keeping the timing right and so forth so that at the moment tho th the idea we 're running with is  is h putting the beep over it.


But you don't want to just totally excise it because um uh , well you have to be careful about excising it , how  how you excise it keeping the timing right and so forth so that at the moment tho th the idea we 're running with is  is h putting the beep over it.

Yeah , you can either beep or it can be silence. I  I couldn't decide. which was the right way to do it.


Yeah , you can either beep or it can be silence. I  I couldn't decide. which was the right way to do it.


if someone is listening to it , there 's no mistake that it 's been beeped out ,


if someone is listening to it , there 's no mistake that it 's been beeped out ,

but for software it 's probably better for it to be silence.


if someone is listening to it , there 's no mistake that it 's been beeped out ,

but for software it 's probably better for it to be silence.

No , no. You can  you know , you could make a m as long as you keep using the same beep , people could make a model of that beep ,


but for software it 's probably better for it to be silence.

No , no. You can  you know , you could make a m as long as you keep using the same beep , people could make a model of that beep ,


No , no. You can  you know , you could make a m as long as you keep using the same beep , people could make a model of that beep ,


Yep. And I use  it 's  it 's , uh  it 's an A below middle C beep ,


Yep. And I use  it 's  it 's , uh  it 's an A below middle C beep ,

It 's very clear. Then you don't think it 's a long pause.


It 's very clear. Then you don't think it 's a long pause.


It 's very clear. Then you don't think it 's a long pause.

Yeah , it 's more obvious that there was something there than if there 's just silence.


Yeah , it 's more obvious that there was something there than if there 's just silence.


Yeah , that  I mean , he 's  he 's removing the old  thing


Yea - right. Right. But I mean if you just replaced it with silence ,  it 's not clear whether that 's really silence or


One  one question. Do you do it on all channels ?


Yeah you have to do it on all channels because it 's , uh  audible.


Yeah you have to do it on all channels because it 's , uh  audible.

Uh , it 's  it 's potentially audible , you could potentially recover it.


Uh , it 's  it 's potentially audible , you could potentially recover it.

Well , the other thing that  you know , I mean the  the alternative might be to s


Uh , it 's  it 's potentially audible , you could potentially recover it.

Well , the other thing that  you know , I mean the  the alternative might be to s

Yeah. Well , I  I haven't thrown away any of the meetings that I beeped. Actually yours is the only one that I beeped and then , uh  the ar DARPA meeting.


Well , the other thing that  you know , I mean the  the alternative might be to s

Yeah. Well , I  I haven't thrown away any of the meetings that I beeped. Actually yours is the only one that I beeped and then , uh  the ar DARPA meeting.


Well , the other thing that  you know , I mean the  the alternative might be to s

Yeah. Well , I  I haven't thrown away any of the meetings that I beeped. Actually yours is the only one that I beeped and then , uh  the ar DARPA meeting.

Sorry , and then the DARPA meeting I just excised completely ,


Yeah. Well , I  I haven't thrown away any of the meetings that I beeped. Actually yours is the only one that I beeped and then , uh  the ar DARPA meeting.

Sorry , and then the DARPA meeting I just excised completely ,


Sorry , and then the DARPA meeting I just excised completely ,


Sorry , and then the DARPA meeting I just excised completely ,

You have some people who only have beeps as their speech in these meetings.


You have some people who only have beeps as their speech in these meetings.


Alright , so , uh  I think we should , uh  uh , go on to the digits ?


Alright , so , uh  I think we should , uh  uh , go on to the digits ?

I have one concept a t I  I want to say , which is that I think it 's nice that you 're preserving the time relations ,


Alright , so , uh  I think we should , uh  uh , go on to the digits ?

I have one concept a t I  I want to say , which is that I think it 's nice that you 're preserving the time relations ,

s so you 're  you 're not just cutting  you 're not doing scissor snips. You 're  you 're keeping the , uh  the time duration of a  de - deleted  deleted part.


I have one concept a t I  I want to say , which is that I think it 's nice that you 're preserving the time relations ,

s so you 're  you 're not just cutting  you 're not doing scissor snips. You 're  you 're keeping the , uh  the time duration of a  de - deleted  deleted part.


s so you 're  you 're not just cutting  you 're not doing scissor snips. You 're  you 're keeping the , uh  the time duration of a  de - deleted  deleted part.


Yeah , since we wanna  possibly synchronize these things as well. Oh , I should have done that.


Yeah , since we wanna  possibly synchronize these things as well. Oh , I should have done that.

So I guess if there 's an overlap ,  like , if I 'm saying something that 's  bleepable and somebody else overlaps during it they also get bleeped , too ?


So I guess if there 's an overlap ,  like , if I 'm saying something that 's  bleepable and somebody else overlaps during it they also get bleeped , too ?


So I guess if there 's an overlap ,  like , if I 'm saying something that 's  bleepable and somebody else overlaps during it they also get bleeped , too ?

You 'll lose it. There 's no way around that.


So I guess if there 's an overlap ,  like , if I 'm saying something that 's  bleepable and somebody else overlaps during it they also get bleeped , too ?

You 'll lose it. There 's no way around that.

Yeah. Um  I d I did  before we do the digits , I did also wanna remind people , uh   please do send me , you know , uh thoughts for an agenda ,


You 'll lose it. There 's no way around that.

Yeah. Um  I d I did  before we do the digits , I did also wanna remind people , uh   please do send me , you know , uh thoughts for an agenda ,


You 'll lose it. There 's no way around that.

Yeah. Um  I d I did  before we do the digits , I did also wanna remind people , uh   please do send me , you know , uh thoughts for an agenda ,

yeah that  that would be that 'd be good.


Yeah. Um  I d I did  before we do the digits , I did also wanna remind people , uh   please do send me , you know , uh thoughts for an agenda ,

yeah that  that would be that 'd be good.


yeah that  that would be that 'd be good.

Eh So that , uh , people 's ideas don't get


Eh So that , uh , people 's ideas don't get

yeah , well it does creep up , doesn't it ?


Eh So that , uh , people 's ideas don't get

yeah , well it does creep up , doesn't it ?

And , I wanted to say , I think this is really interesting  analysis.


yeah , well it does creep up , doesn't it ?

And , I wanted to say , I think this is really interesting  analysis.


And , I wanted to say , I think this is really interesting  analysis.


I meant to say that before I started off on the  Switchboard stuff.


I meant to say that before I started off on the  Switchboard stuff.

I was gonna say " can you do that for the other meetings ,


I was gonna say " can you do that for the other meetings ,


Actually  actually I  I thought that 's what you were giving us was another meeting and I was like , " Oh , OK ! "


How long does it  take , just briefly , like  t to   OK.  to label the ,


How long does it  take , just briefly , like  t to   OK.  to label the ,

No. I have the script now , so , I mean , it can work off the , uh  other thing ,


No. I have the script now , so , I mean , it can work off the , uh  other thing ,


but  Uh , well , yeah. Because , uh  well , I mean  once his  his algorithm is up and running then we can do it that way.


but  Uh , well , yeah. Because , uh  well , I mean  once his  his algorithm is up and running then we can do it that way.

If it works well enough. Right now it 's not. Not quite to the point where it works.


If it works well enough. Right now it 's not. Not quite to the point where it works.


Thanks. Appreciate that. I think  what I  what this has , uh , caused me  so this discussion caused me to wanna subdivide these further. I 'm gonna take a look at the , uh  backchannels , how much we have anal I hope to have that for next time.


Thanks. Appreciate that. I think  what I  what this has , uh , caused me  so this discussion caused me to wanna subdivide these further. I 'm gonna take a look at the , uh  backchannels , how much we have anal I hope to have that for next time.

Yeah , my  my algorithm worked great actually on these , but when you wear it like that or with the uh , lapel  or if you have it very far from your face , that 's when it starts  failing.


Yeah , my  my algorithm worked great actually on these , but when you wear it like that or with the uh , lapel  or if you have it very far from your face , that 's when it starts  failing.


right ? I  I don't want  to change the way we do the meeting.


right ? I  I don't want  to change the way we do the meeting.

It 's uh   so , it was just a comment on the software , not a comment on  prescriptions on how you wear microphones.


It 's uh   so , it was just a comment on the software , not a comment on  prescriptions on how you wear microphones.

OK , that 's  let 's  let 's  let 's do digits.


OK , that 's  let 's  let 's  let 's do digits.


Do you want us to put a mark on the bottom of these when they 've actually been read , or do you just  i i the only one that wasn't read is  is known , so we don't do it. OK.


I call the meeting to order.  Welcome to the third meeting of the House of Commons Special Committee on the COVID-19 Pandemic. Pursuant to the order of reference of Monday, April20, the committee is meeting for the purposes of considering ministerial announcements, allowing members to present petitions, and questioning ministers of the crown, including the Prime Minister, in respect of the COVID-19 pandemic. I understand there's an agreement to observe a moment of silence in memory of the six members of the Canadian Armed Forces who lost their lives last Wednesday in a helicopter crash off the coast of Greece.  We'll return to order. Colleagues, we meet today to continue our discussion about how our country is dealing with the COVID-19 pandemic. As we do, Canadians, like everyone around the world, are doing their best to live their lives until things improve. Meanwhile, as we look towards the future, I believe that it is also important to remember our past and to continue to mark the important moments in our shared history. At this very moment, the Dominion Carillonneur, Dr. Andrea McCrady, is performing a special recital to commemorate the 75th anniversary of the liberation of the Netherlands by the Canadian Forces. In May 1945, Canadian Forces played a major role in liberating the Dutch people from Nazi occupation. May 5 is now a national holiday in the Netherlands that commemorates the event and the great friendship that now exists between our two countries. Today's meeting is taking place by video conference. The proceedings will be made available via the House of Commons website. Please be aware that the webcast will always show the person speaking rather than the entire committee. Let me remind you that, as in the House or in committee, members may not take photographs of their colleagues or film the proceedings. In order to facilitate the work of our interpreters and ensure orderly meetings, I will outline a few rules. Interpretation of this video conference will be done as it is at normal committee meetings and in the House. At the bottom of your screen, you can choose floor, English or French. As you have seen, I change as I am speaking. I have now switched over to English in order to speak English. If you look at the bottom, you have a little flag that indicates whether it's English or French, and that's how we will be speaking. It makes it easier. That was where we had a little bit of a glitch in the last session. I understand that there are no statements by ministers. We can now proceed to presenting petitions for a period not exceeding 15 minutes.  I would like to remind members that petitions presented during a meeting of the special committee must already have been certified by the clerk of petitions.  In addition, to ensure that the petition is considered to have been properly presented, the certificate of the petition and each page of the petition for petitions certified in a previous Parliament should be emailed to the committee no later than 6 p.m. on the day before the committee. I thank all the members for their usual co-operation. Thank you all. Now we'll proceed to presenting petitions. Our first petition comes from the honourable member for Sherwood ParkFort Saskatchewan, Mr. Genuis.

Mr. Chair, I'm pleased to be presenting two petitions today. The first petition is with respect to government Bill C-7. Petitioners raised concerns that this bill removes safeguards from the current euthanasia regime. It includes removing the mandatory 10-day reflection period and the number of required witnesses who will witness a person's consent. The petitioners urge the House of Commons to immediately discontinue the removal of safeguards for people requesting euthanasia, and to put in place additional measures to protect vulnerable people. This would require that bill to be amended or not passed. The second petition is with respect to Senate public bill S-204. This is on organ harvesting and trafficking. Petitioners call on members of the House, and hopefully the Senate as well, to support Bill S-204, which would make it a criminal offence for a person to go abroad and receive an organ for which there has not been consent. It would also create provisions under which a person could be made inadmissible to Canada if they had been involved in organ harvesting or trafficking. Thank you very much.

Thank you. I want to remind all the members that there are specific headsets that have been mandated to all of us. If you don't have one, please talk to your IT ambassador and they will get one to you as quickly as possible. The reason for them is not so much for what you hear, but that our interpreters are working and there are work conditions that really make it difficult. Part of that is not having the appropriate boom on your headset, which will make it very difficult for them to hear and interpret for our members. Now we go to the member for BeachesEast York, Mr. Erskine-Smith.


Mr. Chair, I'm pleased to be presenting two petitions today. The first petition is with respect to government Bill C-7. Petitioners raised concerns that this bill removes safeguards from the current euthanasia regime. It includes removing the mandatory 10-day reflection period and the number of required witnesses who will witness a person's consent. The petitioners urge the House of Commons to immediately discontinue the removal of safeguards for people requesting euthanasia, and to put in place additional measures to protect vulnerable people. This would require that bill to be amended or not passed. The second petition is with respect to Senate public bill S-204. This is on organ harvesting and trafficking. Petitioners call on members of the House, and hopefully the Senate as well, to support Bill S-204, which would make it a criminal offence for a person to go abroad and receive an organ for which there has not been consent. It would also create provisions under which a person could be made inadmissible to Canada if they had been involved in organ harvesting or trafficking. Thank you very much.

Thank you. I want to remind all the members that there are specific headsets that have been mandated to all of us. If you don't have one, please talk to your IT ambassador and they will get one to you as quickly as possible. The reason for them is not so much for what you hear, but that our interpreters are working and there are work conditions that really make it difficult. Part of that is not having the appropriate boom on your headset, which will make it very difficult for them to hear and interpret for our members. Now we go to the member for BeachesEast York, Mr. Erskine-Smith.

Mr. Chair, I had to learn how to tie my tie all over again. It's been so long. I want to thank Jenna Robar, who's led this petition e-2453. The petitioners have noted that there are approximately 60 indigenous languages in Canada and that 2019, last year, was declared by the UN to be the year of indigenous languages. They draw attention to article 13 of the UNDRIP and to the TRC's calls to action numbers 13 to 16. Fundamentally, they call upon the Government of Canada to recognize indigenous languages as being official languages of Canada and to have each language recognized nationally, with implementations on regional and provincial levels, acknowledging that many regions have different languages.


Mr. Chair, I'm pleased to be presenting two petitions today. The first petition is with respect to government Bill C-7. Petitioners raised concerns that this bill removes safeguards from the current euthanasia regime. It includes removing the mandatory 10-day reflection period and the number of required witnesses who will witness a person's consent. The petitioners urge the House of Commons to immediately discontinue the removal of safeguards for people requesting euthanasia, and to put in place additional measures to protect vulnerable people. This would require that bill to be amended or not passed. The second petition is with respect to Senate public bill S-204. This is on organ harvesting and trafficking. Petitioners call on members of the House, and hopefully the Senate as well, to support Bill S-204, which would make it a criminal offence for a person to go abroad and receive an organ for which there has not been consent. It would also create provisions under which a person could be made inadmissible to Canada if they had been involved in organ harvesting or trafficking. Thank you very much.

Thank you. I want to remind all the members that there are specific headsets that have been mandated to all of us. If you don't have one, please talk to your IT ambassador and they will get one to you as quickly as possible. The reason for them is not so much for what you hear, but that our interpreters are working and there are work conditions that really make it difficult. Part of that is not having the appropriate boom on your headset, which will make it very difficult for them to hear and interpret for our members. Now we go to the member for BeachesEast York, Mr. Erskine-Smith.

Mr. Chair, I had to learn how to tie my tie all over again. It's been so long. I want to thank Jenna Robar, who's led this petition e-2453. The petitioners have noted that there are approximately 60 indigenous languages in Canada and that 2019, last year, was declared by the UN to be the year of indigenous languages. They draw attention to article 13 of the UNDRIP and to the TRC's calls to action numbers 13 to 16. Fundamentally, they call upon the Government of Canada to recognize indigenous languages as being official languages of Canada and to have each language recognized nationally, with implementations on regional and provincial levels, acknowledging that many regions have different languages.

Mr. Chair, I am proud to present a petition on behalf of one of my constituents, Myles Lynch of St. Andrews West in my riding. Myles made history as the first Canadian ever to survive three double-lung transplants. Myles lives with cystic fibrosis and has had three lung transplants in the last five years, and he's only 22 years old. Myles created a documentary called 8 Thousand Myles, which had a few showings in my riding. It documented his journey across Canada. One thing Myles has been advocating for is the creation of a national opt-out program for organ donation. Myles asked me how he could help raise awareness of that issue. I mentioned to him e-petitions online and getting people across the country to sign them. I am proud to have this certified today, with 1,318 signatures, asking the Standing Committee on Health to launch a study into the feasibility of the creation of a national opt-out program. I give kudos to Myles not only for his strength personally but also for his advocacy for others and for saving lives in our country by advocating for a better and an improved organ donation system. Kudos to Myles. I'm proud to present this petition today.


Thank you. I want to remind all the members that there are specific headsets that have been mandated to all of us. If you don't have one, please talk to your IT ambassador and they will get one to you as quickly as possible. The reason for them is not so much for what you hear, but that our interpreters are working and there are work conditions that really make it difficult. Part of that is not having the appropriate boom on your headset, which will make it very difficult for them to hear and interpret for our members. Now we go to the member for BeachesEast York, Mr. Erskine-Smith.

Mr. Chair, I had to learn how to tie my tie all over again. It's been so long. I want to thank Jenna Robar, who's led this petition e-2453. The petitioners have noted that there are approximately 60 indigenous languages in Canada and that 2019, last year, was declared by the UN to be the year of indigenous languages. They draw attention to article 13 of the UNDRIP and to the TRC's calls to action numbers 13 to 16. Fundamentally, they call upon the Government of Canada to recognize indigenous languages as being official languages of Canada and to have each language recognized nationally, with implementations on regional and provincial levels, acknowledging that many regions have different languages.

Mr. Chair, I am proud to present a petition on behalf of one of my constituents, Myles Lynch of St. Andrews West in my riding. Myles made history as the first Canadian ever to survive three double-lung transplants. Myles lives with cystic fibrosis and has had three lung transplants in the last five years, and he's only 22 years old. Myles created a documentary called 8 Thousand Myles, which had a few showings in my riding. It documented his journey across Canada. One thing Myles has been advocating for is the creation of a national opt-out program for organ donation. Myles asked me how he could help raise awareness of that issue. I mentioned to him e-petitions online and getting people across the country to sign them. I am proud to have this certified today, with 1,318 signatures, asking the Standing Committee on Health to launch a study into the feasibility of the creation of a national opt-out program. I give kudos to Myles not only for his strength personally but also for his advocacy for others and for saving lives in our country by advocating for a better and an improved organ donation system. Kudos to Myles. I'm proud to present this petition today.

Mr. Chair, I'm very pleased to present this certified petition on behalf of several dozen residents of Toronto, Mississauga and Brampton, Ontario, who add their voices to those of the thousands upon thousands of Canadians who have signed similar petitions. Given that Canadians are living through unprecedented, catastrophic climate events, and at the same time our society, as you know, is suffering from worsening social and economic inequalitieshalf of Canadian families are only $200 away from insolvency in any given monthand particularly given the pandemic that we are currently experiencing, these petitioners are calling on the Government of Canada to support motion M-1, a made-in-Canada green new deal that I am presenting in front of the House of Commons. It calls on Canada to take bold and rapid action to tackle the climate emergency, and to put in place a shift to a clean and renewable energy economy.


Mr. Chair, I had to learn how to tie my tie all over again. It's been so long. I want to thank Jenna Robar, who's led this petition e-2453. The petitioners have noted that there are approximately 60 indigenous languages in Canada and that 2019, last year, was declared by the UN to be the year of indigenous languages. They draw attention to article 13 of the UNDRIP and to the TRC's calls to action numbers 13 to 16. Fundamentally, they call upon the Government of Canada to recognize indigenous languages as being official languages of Canada and to have each language recognized nationally, with implementations on regional and provincial levels, acknowledging that many regions have different languages.

Mr. Chair, I am proud to present a petition on behalf of one of my constituents, Myles Lynch of St. Andrews West in my riding. Myles made history as the first Canadian ever to survive three double-lung transplants. Myles lives with cystic fibrosis and has had three lung transplants in the last five years, and he's only 22 years old. Myles created a documentary called 8 Thousand Myles, which had a few showings in my riding. It documented his journey across Canada. One thing Myles has been advocating for is the creation of a national opt-out program for organ donation. Myles asked me how he could help raise awareness of that issue. I mentioned to him e-petitions online and getting people across the country to sign them. I am proud to have this certified today, with 1,318 signatures, asking the Standing Committee on Health to launch a study into the feasibility of the creation of a national opt-out program. I give kudos to Myles not only for his strength personally but also for his advocacy for others and for saving lives in our country by advocating for a better and an improved organ donation system. Kudos to Myles. I'm proud to present this petition today.

Mr. Chair, I'm very pleased to present this certified petition on behalf of several dozen residents of Toronto, Mississauga and Brampton, Ontario, who add their voices to those of the thousands upon thousands of Canadians who have signed similar petitions. Given that Canadians are living through unprecedented, catastrophic climate events, and at the same time our society, as you know, is suffering from worsening social and economic inequalitieshalf of Canadian families are only $200 away from insolvency in any given monthand particularly given the pandemic that we are currently experiencing, these petitioners are calling on the Government of Canada to support motion M-1, a made-in-Canada green new deal that I am presenting in front of the House of Commons. It calls on Canada to take bold and rapid action to tackle the climate emergency, and to put in place a shift to a clean and renewable energy economy.

Mr. Chair, it's an honour to table a petition on behalf of constituents from CourtenayAlberni. They are concerned, obviously, about fentanyl-related deaths. Over 12,000 Canadians have died over the last four years due to fentanyl-poisoned sources. They cite that the current war on drugs has been costly and grossly ineffective; that it has resulted in widespread stigma towards addiction and against those who use illicit drugs; and that criminalization of particular substances has resulted in the establishment of a drug trade that now trafficks dangerous and lethal products such as fentanyl. They are citing that regulating to ensure safe sources, with proper measures and bylaws, will reduce the criminal element associated with street drugs. Problematic substance use is a health issue and is not resolved through criminalization of personal possession and consumption. They are calling on the Government of Canada to declare the current opioid overdose and fenanyl poisoning crisis a national public health emergency under the Emergencies Act. They are calling for the government to reform current drug policy to decriminalize personal possession, as has been done in Portugal and other countries, and to create with urgency and immediacy a system to provide safe and unadulterated access to substances so that people who use substances experimentally, recreationally or chronically are not at imminent risk of overdose due to a contaminated source.


Mr. Chair, I am proud to present a petition on behalf of one of my constituents, Myles Lynch of St. Andrews West in my riding. Myles made history as the first Canadian ever to survive three double-lung transplants. Myles lives with cystic fibrosis and has had three lung transplants in the last five years, and he's only 22 years old. Myles created a documentary called 8 Thousand Myles, which had a few showings in my riding. It documented his journey across Canada. One thing Myles has been advocating for is the creation of a national opt-out program for organ donation. Myles asked me how he could help raise awareness of that issue. I mentioned to him e-petitions online and getting people across the country to sign them. I am proud to have this certified today, with 1,318 signatures, asking the Standing Committee on Health to launch a study into the feasibility of the creation of a national opt-out program. I give kudos to Myles not only for his strength personally but also for his advocacy for others and for saving lives in our country by advocating for a better and an improved organ donation system. Kudos to Myles. I'm proud to present this petition today.

Mr. Chair, I'm very pleased to present this certified petition on behalf of several dozen residents of Toronto, Mississauga and Brampton, Ontario, who add their voices to those of the thousands upon thousands of Canadians who have signed similar petitions. Given that Canadians are living through unprecedented, catastrophic climate events, and at the same time our society, as you know, is suffering from worsening social and economic inequalitieshalf of Canadian families are only $200 away from insolvency in any given monthand particularly given the pandemic that we are currently experiencing, these petitioners are calling on the Government of Canada to support motion M-1, a made-in-Canada green new deal that I am presenting in front of the House of Commons. It calls on Canada to take bold and rapid action to tackle the climate emergency, and to put in place a shift to a clean and renewable energy economy.

Mr. Chair, it's an honour to table a petition on behalf of constituents from CourtenayAlberni. They are concerned, obviously, about fentanyl-related deaths. Over 12,000 Canadians have died over the last four years due to fentanyl-poisoned sources. They cite that the current war on drugs has been costly and grossly ineffective; that it has resulted in widespread stigma towards addiction and against those who use illicit drugs; and that criminalization of particular substances has resulted in the establishment of a drug trade that now trafficks dangerous and lethal products such as fentanyl. They are citing that regulating to ensure safe sources, with proper measures and bylaws, will reduce the criminal element associated with street drugs. Problematic substance use is a health issue and is not resolved through criminalization of personal possession and consumption. They are calling on the Government of Canada to declare the current opioid overdose and fenanyl poisoning crisis a national public health emergency under the Emergencies Act. They are calling for the government to reform current drug policy to decriminalize personal possession, as has been done in Portugal and other countries, and to create with urgency and immediacy a system to provide safe and unadulterated access to substances so that people who use substances experimentally, recreationally or chronically are not at imminent risk of overdose due to a contaminated source.

Mr. Chair, I'm presenting a petition today that contains the concerns of Canadians in my riding with the government's approach to firearms legislation and regulation. The petition highlights that the Liberal government's December 5, 2019, Speech from the Throne contains numerous inaccuracies about current firearms legislation and regulation; that the term military-style assault rifles is a political phrase undefined in Canadian law; that municipalities are constitutionally unable to enact criminal law to ban handguns in their jurisdictions; that the experts, including chiefs of police, agree that banning firearms and requiring law-abiding gun owners to follow more unnecessary red tape will not increase public safety; that the majority of guns used in violent crimes are smuggled into Canada from the United States; and that the Liberal government continues to target law-abiding firearms owners instead of the gangs, drug traffickers and illegal gun traffickers responsible for violence in our communities. The petitioners in MissionMatsquiFraser Canyon are calling on the government to stop targeting law-abiding firearms owners; to cancel all plans to confiscate firearms legally owned by federally licensed, RCMP-vetted Canadians; and to focus our limited resources on anti-gang enforcement, on reducing the involvement of at-risk youth and gangs, on mental health and on providing the Canada Border Services Agency with the tools they need to do their job effectively.


Mr. Chair, I'm very pleased to present this certified petition on behalf of several dozen residents of Toronto, Mississauga and Brampton, Ontario, who add their voices to those of the thousands upon thousands of Canadians who have signed similar petitions. Given that Canadians are living through unprecedented, catastrophic climate events, and at the same time our society, as you know, is suffering from worsening social and economic inequalitieshalf of Canadian families are only $200 away from insolvency in any given monthand particularly given the pandemic that we are currently experiencing, these petitioners are calling on the Government of Canada to support motion M-1, a made-in-Canada green new deal that I am presenting in front of the House of Commons. It calls on Canada to take bold and rapid action to tackle the climate emergency, and to put in place a shift to a clean and renewable energy economy.

Mr. Chair, it's an honour to table a petition on behalf of constituents from CourtenayAlberni. They are concerned, obviously, about fentanyl-related deaths. Over 12,000 Canadians have died over the last four years due to fentanyl-poisoned sources. They cite that the current war on drugs has been costly and grossly ineffective; that it has resulted in widespread stigma towards addiction and against those who use illicit drugs; and that criminalization of particular substances has resulted in the establishment of a drug trade that now trafficks dangerous and lethal products such as fentanyl. They are citing that regulating to ensure safe sources, with proper measures and bylaws, will reduce the criminal element associated with street drugs. Problematic substance use is a health issue and is not resolved through criminalization of personal possession and consumption. They are calling on the Government of Canada to declare the current opioid overdose and fenanyl poisoning crisis a national public health emergency under the Emergencies Act. They are calling for the government to reform current drug policy to decriminalize personal possession, as has been done in Portugal and other countries, and to create with urgency and immediacy a system to provide safe and unadulterated access to substances so that people who use substances experimentally, recreationally or chronically are not at imminent risk of overdose due to a contaminated source.

Mr. Chair, I'm presenting a petition today that contains the concerns of Canadians in my riding with the government's approach to firearms legislation and regulation. The petition highlights that the Liberal government's December 5, 2019, Speech from the Throne contains numerous inaccuracies about current firearms legislation and regulation; that the term military-style assault rifles is a political phrase undefined in Canadian law; that municipalities are constitutionally unable to enact criminal law to ban handguns in their jurisdictions; that the experts, including chiefs of police, agree that banning firearms and requiring law-abiding gun owners to follow more unnecessary red tape will not increase public safety; that the majority of guns used in violent crimes are smuggled into Canada from the United States; and that the Liberal government continues to target law-abiding firearms owners instead of the gangs, drug traffickers and illegal gun traffickers responsible for violence in our communities. The petitioners in MissionMatsquiFraser Canyon are calling on the government to stop targeting law-abiding firearms owners; to cancel all plans to confiscate firearms legally owned by federally licensed, RCMP-vetted Canadians; and to focus our limited resources on anti-gang enforcement, on reducing the involvement of at-risk youth and gangs, on mental health and on providing the Canada Border Services Agency with the tools they need to do their job effectively.

Very good. That's all for petitions today. We will now proceed to the questioning of ministers. I would like to remind honourable members that no member shall be recognized for more than five minutes at a time and that members may split their time with one or more members by so indicating to the chair. Ministers responding to the question should do so by simply turning on their mike and speaking. I want to again remind honourable members to use the boom on the official headsets so that everything runs smoothly, not only for ourselves but also for the interpreters.  We start the question period with Mr.Paul-Hus.


Mr. Chair, it's an honour to table a petition on behalf of constituents from CourtenayAlberni. They are concerned, obviously, about fentanyl-related deaths. Over 12,000 Canadians have died over the last four years due to fentanyl-poisoned sources. They cite that the current war on drugs has been costly and grossly ineffective; that it has resulted in widespread stigma towards addiction and against those who use illicit drugs; and that criminalization of particular substances has resulted in the establishment of a drug trade that now trafficks dangerous and lethal products such as fentanyl. They are citing that regulating to ensure safe sources, with proper measures and bylaws, will reduce the criminal element associated with street drugs. Problematic substance use is a health issue and is not resolved through criminalization of personal possession and consumption. They are calling on the Government of Canada to declare the current opioid overdose and fenanyl poisoning crisis a national public health emergency under the Emergencies Act. They are calling for the government to reform current drug policy to decriminalize personal possession, as has been done in Portugal and other countries, and to create with urgency and immediacy a system to provide safe and unadulterated access to substances so that people who use substances experimentally, recreationally or chronically are not at imminent risk of overdose due to a contaminated source.

Mr. Chair, I'm presenting a petition today that contains the concerns of Canadians in my riding with the government's approach to firearms legislation and regulation. The petition highlights that the Liberal government's December 5, 2019, Speech from the Throne contains numerous inaccuracies about current firearms legislation and regulation; that the term military-style assault rifles is a political phrase undefined in Canadian law; that municipalities are constitutionally unable to enact criminal law to ban handguns in their jurisdictions; that the experts, including chiefs of police, agree that banning firearms and requiring law-abiding gun owners to follow more unnecessary red tape will not increase public safety; that the majority of guns used in violent crimes are smuggled into Canada from the United States; and that the Liberal government continues to target law-abiding firearms owners instead of the gangs, drug traffickers and illegal gun traffickers responsible for violence in our communities. The petitioners in MissionMatsquiFraser Canyon are calling on the government to stop targeting law-abiding firearms owners; to cancel all plans to confiscate firearms legally owned by federally licensed, RCMP-vetted Canadians; and to focus our limited resources on anti-gang enforcement, on reducing the involvement of at-risk youth and gangs, on mental health and on providing the Canada Border Services Agency with the tools they need to do their job effectively.

Very good. That's all for petitions today. We will now proceed to the questioning of ministers. I would like to remind honourable members that no member shall be recognized for more than five minutes at a time and that members may split their time with one or more members by so indicating to the chair. Ministers responding to the question should do so by simply turning on their mike and speaking. I want to again remind honourable members to use the boom on the official headsets so that everything runs smoothly, not only for ourselves but also for the interpreters.  We start the question period with Mr.Paul-Hus.

Thank you, Mr.Chair. Although we are right in the middle of a pandemic and the government has agreed to set aside all parliamentary business in order to concentrate solely on eliminating the virus in Canada and its impacts, the Prime Minister is deceiving Canadians by introducing measures to punish law-abiding firearm owners. Why?


Mr. Chair, I'm presenting a petition today that contains the concerns of Canadians in my riding with the government's approach to firearms legislation and regulation. The petition highlights that the Liberal government's December 5, 2019, Speech from the Throne contains numerous inaccuracies about current firearms legislation and regulation; that the term military-style assault rifles is a political phrase undefined in Canadian law; that municipalities are constitutionally unable to enact criminal law to ban handguns in their jurisdictions; that the experts, including chiefs of police, agree that banning firearms and requiring law-abiding gun owners to follow more unnecessary red tape will not increase public safety; that the majority of guns used in violent crimes are smuggled into Canada from the United States; and that the Liberal government continues to target law-abiding firearms owners instead of the gangs, drug traffickers and illegal gun traffickers responsible for violence in our communities. The petitioners in MissionMatsquiFraser Canyon are calling on the government to stop targeting law-abiding firearms owners; to cancel all plans to confiscate firearms legally owned by federally licensed, RCMP-vetted Canadians; and to focus our limited resources on anti-gang enforcement, on reducing the involvement of at-risk youth and gangs, on mental health and on providing the Canada Border Services Agency with the tools they need to do their job effectively.

Very good. That's all for petitions today. We will now proceed to the questioning of ministers. I would like to remind honourable members that no member shall be recognized for more than five minutes at a time and that members may split their time with one or more members by so indicating to the chair. Ministers responding to the question should do so by simply turning on their mike and speaking. I want to again remind honourable members to use the boom on the official headsets so that everything runs smoothly, not only for ourselves but also for the interpreters.  We start the question period with Mr.Paul-Hus.

Thank you, Mr.Chair. Although we are right in the middle of a pandemic and the government has agreed to set aside all parliamentary business in order to concentrate solely on eliminating the virus in Canada and its impacts, the Prime Minister is deceiving Canadians by introducing measures to punish law-abiding firearm owners. Why?

Mr.Chair, I feel that all Canadians were affected by the massacre in Nova Scotia. Once again, too many families are facing tragedy and tremendous grief. During the last election campaign, we promised to ban military-style assault weapons, and that is exactly what we have done. We will be working with members from all parties in order to continue strengthening gun control. It is a shame that, once more, the Conservatives do not want to strengthen gun control in the country.


Very good. That's all for petitions today. We will now proceed to the questioning of ministers. I would like to remind honourable members that no member shall be recognized for more than five minutes at a time and that members may split their time with one or more members by so indicating to the chair. Ministers responding to the question should do so by simply turning on their mike and speaking. I want to again remind honourable members to use the boom on the official headsets so that everything runs smoothly, not only for ourselves but also for the interpreters.  We start the question period with Mr.Paul-Hus.

Thank you, Mr.Chair. Although we are right in the middle of a pandemic and the government has agreed to set aside all parliamentary business in order to concentrate solely on eliminating the virus in Canada and its impacts, the Prime Minister is deceiving Canadians by introducing measures to punish law-abiding firearm owners. Why?

Mr.Chair, I feel that all Canadians were affected by the massacre in Nova Scotia. Once again, too many families are facing tragedy and tremendous grief. During the last election campaign, we promised to ban military-style assault weapons, and that is exactly what we have done. We will be working with members from all parties in order to continue strengthening gun control. It is a shame that, once more, the Conservatives do not want to strengthen gun control in the country.

Mr.Chair, I understand the Prime Minister's reply. However, I would like to know whether he considers that, with this order in council, organized crime, street gangs and other criminals are simply going to turn in their weapons.


Thank you, Mr.Chair. Although we are right in the middle of a pandemic and the government has agreed to set aside all parliamentary business in order to concentrate solely on eliminating the virus in Canada and its impacts, the Prime Minister is deceiving Canadians by introducing measures to punish law-abiding firearm owners. Why?

Mr.Chair, I feel that all Canadians were affected by the massacre in Nova Scotia. Once again, too many families are facing tragedy and tremendous grief. During the last election campaign, we promised to ban military-style assault weapons, and that is exactly what we have done. We will be working with members from all parties in order to continue strengthening gun control. It is a shame that, once more, the Conservatives do not want to strengthen gun control in the country.

Mr.Chair, I understand the Prime Minister's reply. However, I would like to know whether he considers that, with this order in council, organized crime, street gangs and other criminals are simply going to turn in their weapons.

This is indeed only a first step, but it is an important one. We are doing other things to eliminate or restrict handguns in our municipalities, to strengthen the control at our borders, and to implement other measures. I am pleased to hear the hon. member speak of those measures, because we are going to work together in the House to strengthen gun control. I hope that the Conservative Party will be part of that discussion in a positive way, in order to keep Canadians safe.


Mr.Chair, I feel that all Canadians were affected by the massacre in Nova Scotia. Once again, too many families are facing tragedy and tremendous grief. During the last election campaign, we promised to ban military-style assault weapons, and that is exactly what we have done. We will be working with members from all parties in order to continue strengthening gun control. It is a shame that, once more, the Conservatives do not want to strengthen gun control in the country.

Mr.Chair, I understand the Prime Minister's reply. However, I would like to know whether he considers that, with this order in council, organized crime, street gangs and other criminals are simply going to turn in their weapons.

This is indeed only a first step, but it is an important one. We are doing other things to eliminate or restrict handguns in our municipalities, to strengthen the control at our borders, and to implement other measures. I am pleased to hear the hon. member speak of those measures, because we are going to work together in the House to strengthen gun control. I hope that the Conservative Party will be part of that discussion in a positive way, in order to keep Canadians safe.

Mr.Chair, I can simply say to the Prime Minister that the Conservative Party has always been committed to battling criminals, not law-abiding citizens. Speaking of criminals, we know that, even before the pandemic, the Prime Minister had asked the Parole Board of Canada to release prisoners more easily and more quickly. Now we are learning that, because of the pandemic, some releases are happening very quickly. The Minister of Public Safety told us that the people were approaching the end of their sentences or were older, but we are learning in the media that some dangerous criminals are being released. Can the Prime Minister give us an explanation?


Mr.Chair, I understand the Prime Minister's reply. However, I would like to know whether he considers that, with this order in council, organized crime, street gangs and other criminals are simply going to turn in their weapons.

This is indeed only a first step, but it is an important one. We are doing other things to eliminate or restrict handguns in our municipalities, to strengthen the control at our borders, and to implement other measures. I am pleased to hear the hon. member speak of those measures, because we are going to work together in the House to strengthen gun control. I hope that the Conservative Party will be part of that discussion in a positive way, in order to keep Canadians safe.

Mr.Chair, I can simply say to the Prime Minister that the Conservative Party has always been committed to battling criminals, not law-abiding citizens. Speaking of criminals, we know that, even before the pandemic, the Prime Minister had asked the Parole Board of Canada to release prisoners more easily and more quickly. Now we are learning that, because of the pandemic, some releases are happening very quickly. The Minister of Public Safety told us that the people were approaching the end of their sentences or were older, but we are learning in the media that some dangerous criminals are being released. Can the Prime Minister give us an explanation?

The protection, the safety and the health of all Canadians are important for the government. This is why we have taken additional measures in our correctional services to ensure that guards and inmates are protected. We have indeed opened the doors to some more speedy releases, but only in very specific cases that present little or no danger for Canadians. We have managed to find the right balance. We must protect Canadians and we must also ensure that they are safe. Those two things go hand-in-hand.


This is indeed only a first step, but it is an important one. We are doing other things to eliminate or restrict handguns in our municipalities, to strengthen the control at our borders, and to implement other measures. I am pleased to hear the hon. member speak of those measures, because we are going to work together in the House to strengthen gun control. I hope that the Conservative Party will be part of that discussion in a positive way, in order to keep Canadians safe.

Mr.Chair, I can simply say to the Prime Minister that the Conservative Party has always been committed to battling criminals, not law-abiding citizens. Speaking of criminals, we know that, even before the pandemic, the Prime Minister had asked the Parole Board of Canada to release prisoners more easily and more quickly. Now we are learning that, because of the pandemic, some releases are happening very quickly. The Minister of Public Safety told us that the people were approaching the end of their sentences or were older, but we are learning in the media that some dangerous criminals are being released. Can the Prime Minister give us an explanation?

The protection, the safety and the health of all Canadians are important for the government. This is why we have taken additional measures in our correctional services to ensure that guards and inmates are protected. We have indeed opened the doors to some more speedy releases, but only in very specific cases that present little or no danger for Canadians. We have managed to find the right balance. We must protect Canadians and we must also ensure that they are safe. Those two things go hand-in-hand.

So is the Prime Minister confirming to us that no dangerous criminals have been precipitously released so that they do not have to experience COVID-19 within the walls?


Mr.Chair, I can simply say to the Prime Minister that the Conservative Party has always been committed to battling criminals, not law-abiding citizens. Speaking of criminals, we know that, even before the pandemic, the Prime Minister had asked the Parole Board of Canada to release prisoners more easily and more quickly. Now we are learning that, because of the pandemic, some releases are happening very quickly. The Minister of Public Safety told us that the people were approaching the end of their sentences or were older, but we are learning in the media that some dangerous criminals are being released. Can the Prime Minister give us an explanation?

The protection, the safety and the health of all Canadians are important for the government. This is why we have taken additional measures in our correctional services to ensure that guards and inmates are protected. We have indeed opened the doors to some more speedy releases, but only in very specific cases that present little or no danger for Canadians. We have managed to find the right balance. We must protect Canadians and we must also ensure that they are safe. Those two things go hand-in-hand.

So is the Prime Minister confirming to us that no dangerous criminals have been precipitously released so that they do not have to experience COVID-19 within the walls?

There are very strict rules and principles to ensure that people posing a threat to society are not released.


The protection, the safety and the health of all Canadians are important for the government. This is why we have taken additional measures in our correctional services to ensure that guards and inmates are protected. We have indeed opened the doors to some more speedy releases, but only in very specific cases that present little or no danger for Canadians. We have managed to find the right balance. We must protect Canadians and we must also ensure that they are safe. Those two things go hand-in-hand.

So is the Prime Minister confirming to us that no dangerous criminals have been precipitously released so that they do not have to experience COVID-19 within the walls?

There are very strict rules and principles to ensure that people posing a threat to society are not released.


So is the Prime Minister confirming to us that no dangerous criminals have been precipitously released so that they do not have to experience COVID-19 within the walls?

There are very strict rules and principles to ensure that people posing a threat to society are not released.

Thank you, Mr.Chair. The Chinese government has not been transparent with the rest of the world about the coronavirus. Australia asked for an in-depth investigation, but has received threats from the communist regime. Is Canada going to stand by its allies in the Five Eyes and demand that the Chinese government be completely transparent?


There are very strict rules and principles to ensure that people posing a threat to society are not released.

Thank you, Mr.Chair. The Chinese government has not been transparent with the rest of the world about the coronavirus. Australia asked for an in-depth investigation, but has received threats from the communist regime. Is Canada going to stand by its allies in the Five Eyes and demand that the Chinese government be completely transparent?

We continue to stand in solidarity with our allies, including the Five Eyes, as they have stood in solidarity with Canada in terms of the two Canadians who have been unjustly detained for a long time in China. In the coming months and years, we expect to obtain answers to all our questions about the origin of this pandemic, including questions that are important for China. At the same time, we are going to work hard to ensure that all Canadians have the equipment and the protection they need to get through this pandemic.


Thank you, Mr.Chair. The Chinese government has not been transparent with the rest of the world about the coronavirus. Australia asked for an in-depth investigation, but has received threats from the communist regime. Is Canada going to stand by its allies in the Five Eyes and demand that the Chinese government be completely transparent?

We continue to stand in solidarity with our allies, including the Five Eyes, as they have stood in solidarity with Canada in terms of the two Canadians who have been unjustly detained for a long time in China. In the coming months and years, we expect to obtain answers to all our questions about the origin of this pandemic, including questions that are important for China. At the same time, we are going to work hard to ensure that all Canadians have the equipment and the protection they need to get through this pandemic.


Thank you, Mr.Chair. The Chinese government has not been transparent with the rest of the world about the coronavirus. Australia asked for an in-depth investigation, but has received threats from the communist regime. Is Canada going to stand by its allies in the Five Eyes and demand that the Chinese government be completely transparent?

We continue to stand in solidarity with our allies, including the Five Eyes, as they have stood in solidarity with Canada in terms of the two Canadians who have been unjustly detained for a long time in China. In the coming months and years, we expect to obtain answers to all our questions about the origin of this pandemic, including questions that are important for China. At the same time, we are going to work hard to ensure that all Canadians have the equipment and the protection they need to get through this pandemic.

Thank you, Mr.Chair. I am sorry that I do not have my official headset. I was elsewhere, and I did not bring it with me. I hope that you can still hear me properly. For some days, discussions have been going on between people from the Bloc Qubcois and people from the government with a view to collaboratively coming up with a proposal for seniors in Quebec and Canada. The gist of our proposal is to temporarily increase the old age security by about $25per week, or $110per month. By the way, I hate the term "old age security. I prefer "senior security. The discussion has been going on for some time and it's a proposal that we made in the election campaign. We are asking for it to be done at this point, at least temporarily. Parliament stopped sitting in the middle of March. We are now in May, and seniors still have nothing. They are impatient themselves, and we spend a good part of our days answering them. Given that impatience, I realized I should not be the one answering them, it should be the Prime Minister. So here is my question for the Prime Minister: what are you doing to seek a solution that will increase the purchasing power of seniors in Quebec and Canada in the very short term?


We continue to stand in solidarity with our allies, including the Five Eyes, as they have stood in solidarity with Canada in terms of the two Canadians who have been unjustly detained for a long time in China. In the coming months and years, we expect to obtain answers to all our questions about the origin of this pandemic, including questions that are important for China. At the same time, we are going to work hard to ensure that all Canadians have the equipment and the protection they need to get through this pandemic.

Thank you, Mr.Chair. I am sorry that I do not have my official headset. I was elsewhere, and I did not bring it with me. I hope that you can still hear me properly. For some days, discussions have been going on between people from the Bloc Qubcois and people from the government with a view to collaboratively coming up with a proposal for seniors in Quebec and Canada. The gist of our proposal is to temporarily increase the old age security by about $25per week, or $110per month. By the way, I hate the term "old age security. I prefer "senior security. The discussion has been going on for some time and it's a proposal that we made in the election campaign. We are asking for it to be done at this point, at least temporarily. Parliament stopped sitting in the middle of March. We are now in May, and seniors still have nothing. They are impatient themselves, and we spend a good part of our days answering them. Given that impatience, I realized I should not be the one answering them, it should be the Prime Minister. So here is my question for the Prime Minister: what are you doing to seek a solution that will increase the purchasing power of seniors in Quebec and Canada in the very short term?

Clearly, seniors need support and significant services from us because of COVID-19. Our priority was to implement income replacement benefits for workers who have lost their jobs because of COVID-19. Then we announced different measures, including measures for seniors. The most vulnerable seniors are going to receive reimbursement of the GST, which will help them very quickly. We have also reduced by 25% the minimum amount that must be withdrawn from registered retirement income funds. We have also channelled $9million through the United Way, to help the most vulnerable seniors. Absolutely, I recognize that more must be done. I am very pleased that we have been able to work with other parliamentarians, including those in the Bloc Qubcois, to hear these concerns and to find the best way to help seniors in the short term. In terms of the pandemic, they have concerns about their physical security, but also about their financial security. We will have more to say about this soon.


Thank you, Mr.Chair. I am sorry that I do not have my official headset. I was elsewhere, and I did not bring it with me. I hope that you can still hear me properly. For some days, discussions have been going on between people from the Bloc Qubcois and people from the government with a view to collaboratively coming up with a proposal for seniors in Quebec and Canada. The gist of our proposal is to temporarily increase the old age security by about $25per week, or $110per month. By the way, I hate the term "old age security. I prefer "senior security. The discussion has been going on for some time and it's a proposal that we made in the election campaign. We are asking for it to be done at this point, at least temporarily. Parliament stopped sitting in the middle of March. We are now in May, and seniors still have nothing. They are impatient themselves, and we spend a good part of our days answering them. Given that impatience, I realized I should not be the one answering them, it should be the Prime Minister. So here is my question for the Prime Minister: what are you doing to seek a solution that will increase the purchasing power of seniors in Quebec and Canada in the very short term?

Clearly, seniors need support and significant services from us because of COVID-19. Our priority was to implement income replacement benefits for workers who have lost their jobs because of COVID-19. Then we announced different measures, including measures for seniors. The most vulnerable seniors are going to receive reimbursement of the GST, which will help them very quickly. We have also reduced by 25% the minimum amount that must be withdrawn from registered retirement income funds. We have also channelled $9million through the United Way, to help the most vulnerable seniors. Absolutely, I recognize that more must be done. I am very pleased that we have been able to work with other parliamentarians, including those in the Bloc Qubcois, to hear these concerns and to find the best way to help seniors in the short term. In terms of the pandemic, they have concerns about their physical security, but also about their financial security. We will have more to say about this soon.

In the last few hours, the Prime Minister has indicated that he could need the cooperation of other parties, including the Bloc Qubcois, on a completely different matter. We are very open to that discussion, but we want the same openness when we are asking for something to serve the people of Quebec. The cost of a basket of groceries has increased for seniors, as it has for everyone else. It's true for all seniors over 65years old, of course. The current old age pension represents less than half of the Canada emergency student benefit. It represents less than one third of the basic Canada emergency response benefit. Seniors in my constituency, as in any other of the 338constituencies, are asking what we are doing. They are asking how there can be nothing for them. When will there be something for them? I want to be able to give them an answer of some kind. What is the Prime Minister's answer? I will repeat it to them.


Thank you, Mr.Chair. I am sorry that I do not have my official headset. I was elsewhere, and I did not bring it with me. I hope that you can still hear me properly. For some days, discussions have been going on between people from the Bloc Qubcois and people from the government with a view to collaboratively coming up with a proposal for seniors in Quebec and Canada. The gist of our proposal is to temporarily increase the old age security by about $25per week, or $110per month. By the way, I hate the term "old age security. I prefer "senior security. The discussion has been going on for some time and it's a proposal that we made in the election campaign. We are asking for it to be done at this point, at least temporarily. Parliament stopped sitting in the middle of March. We are now in May, and seniors still have nothing. They are impatient themselves, and we spend a good part of our days answering them. Given that impatience, I realized I should not be the one answering them, it should be the Prime Minister. So here is my question for the Prime Minister: what are you doing to seek a solution that will increase the purchasing power of seniors in Quebec and Canada in the very short term?

Clearly, seniors need support and significant services from us because of COVID-19. Our priority was to implement income replacement benefits for workers who have lost their jobs because of COVID-19. Then we announced different measures, including measures for seniors. The most vulnerable seniors are going to receive reimbursement of the GST, which will help them very quickly. We have also reduced by 25% the minimum amount that must be withdrawn from registered retirement income funds. We have also channelled $9million through the United Way, to help the most vulnerable seniors. Absolutely, I recognize that more must be done. I am very pleased that we have been able to work with other parliamentarians, including those in the Bloc Qubcois, to hear these concerns and to find the best way to help seniors in the short term. In terms of the pandemic, they have concerns about their physical security, but also about their financial security. We will have more to say about this soon.

In the last few hours, the Prime Minister has indicated that he could need the cooperation of other parties, including the Bloc Qubcois, on a completely different matter. We are very open to that discussion, but we want the same openness when we are asking for something to serve the people of Quebec. The cost of a basket of groceries has increased for seniors, as it has for everyone else. It's true for all seniors over 65years old, of course. The current old age pension represents less than half of the Canada emergency student benefit. It represents less than one third of the basic Canada emergency response benefit. Seniors in my constituency, as in any other of the 338constituencies, are asking what we are doing. They are asking how there can be nothing for them. When will there be something for them? I want to be able to give them an answer of some kind. What is the Prime Minister's answer? I will repeat it to them.

There will be announcements in the coming days on the way in which we will be able to help seniors, particularly the most vulnerable seniors. We recognize that the cost of a basket of groceries is increasing for everyone. That is why we have to do better for our seniors. There are horror stories, whether about the CHSLDs, or about our most vulnerable seniors across the country. Far too many families are experiencing tremendous grief. There are seniors who are alone, seniors who are afraid of falling ill without ever seeing their grandchildren or their children again. We have to be there for those who belong to that great generation that fought for us during the second world war. Now we have to fight for them in their homes. That is exactly what we are going to do.


Clearly, seniors need support and significant services from us because of COVID-19. Our priority was to implement income replacement benefits for workers who have lost their jobs because of COVID-19. Then we announced different measures, including measures for seniors. The most vulnerable seniors are going to receive reimbursement of the GST, which will help them very quickly. We have also reduced by 25% the minimum amount that must be withdrawn from registered retirement income funds. We have also channelled $9million through the United Way, to help the most vulnerable seniors. Absolutely, I recognize that more must be done. I am very pleased that we have been able to work with other parliamentarians, including those in the Bloc Qubcois, to hear these concerns and to find the best way to help seniors in the short term. In terms of the pandemic, they have concerns about their physical security, but also about their financial security. We will have more to say about this soon.

In the last few hours, the Prime Minister has indicated that he could need the cooperation of other parties, including the Bloc Qubcois, on a completely different matter. We are very open to that discussion, but we want the same openness when we are asking for something to serve the people of Quebec. The cost of a basket of groceries has increased for seniors, as it has for everyone else. It's true for all seniors over 65years old, of course. The current old age pension represents less than half of the Canada emergency student benefit. It represents less than one third of the basic Canada emergency response benefit. Seniors in my constituency, as in any other of the 338constituencies, are asking what we are doing. They are asking how there can be nothing for them. When will there be something for them? I want to be able to give them an answer of some kind. What is the Prime Minister's answer? I will repeat it to them.

There will be announcements in the coming days on the way in which we will be able to help seniors, particularly the most vulnerable seniors. We recognize that the cost of a basket of groceries is increasing for everyone. That is why we have to do better for our seniors. There are horror stories, whether about the CHSLDs, or about our most vulnerable seniors across the country. Far too many families are experiencing tremendous grief. There are seniors who are alone, seniors who are afraid of falling ill without ever seeing their grandchildren or their children again. We have to be there for those who belong to that great generation that fought for us during the second world war. Now we have to fight for them in their homes. That is exactly what we are going to do.

We'll go to the next question. Ms. Collins.


In the last few hours, the Prime Minister has indicated that he could need the cooperation of other parties, including the Bloc Qubcois, on a completely different matter. We are very open to that discussion, but we want the same openness when we are asking for something to serve the people of Quebec. The cost of a basket of groceries has increased for seniors, as it has for everyone else. It's true for all seniors over 65years old, of course. The current old age pension represents less than half of the Canada emergency student benefit. It represents less than one third of the basic Canada emergency response benefit. Seniors in my constituency, as in any other of the 338constituencies, are asking what we are doing. They are asking how there can be nothing for them. When will there be something for them? I want to be able to give them an answer of some kind. What is the Prime Minister's answer? I will repeat it to them.

There will be announcements in the coming days on the way in which we will be able to help seniors, particularly the most vulnerable seniors. We recognize that the cost of a basket of groceries is increasing for everyone. That is why we have to do better for our seniors. There are horror stories, whether about the CHSLDs, or about our most vulnerable seniors across the country. Far too many families are experiencing tremendous grief. There are seniors who are alone, seniors who are afraid of falling ill without ever seeing their grandchildren or their children again. We have to be there for those who belong to that great generation that fought for us during the second world war. Now we have to fight for them in their homes. That is exactly what we are going to do.

We'll go to the next question. Ms. Collins.

Mr. Chair, every day I hear from people who are struggling to pay their bills and to keep a roof over their head. Instead of making sure that Canadians get the help they need, the government has created complicated programs that are still letting people fall through the cracks. If the Prime Minister won't commit to a universal benefit, will he at least commit to removing the restrictive eligibility criteria that are leaving the most vulnerable people behind?


There will be announcements in the coming days on the way in which we will be able to help seniors, particularly the most vulnerable seniors. We recognize that the cost of a basket of groceries is increasing for everyone. That is why we have to do better for our seniors. There are horror stories, whether about the CHSLDs, or about our most vulnerable seniors across the country. Far too many families are experiencing tremendous grief. There are seniors who are alone, seniors who are afraid of falling ill without ever seeing their grandchildren or their children again. We have to be there for those who belong to that great generation that fought for us during the second world war. Now we have to fight for them in their homes. That is exactly what we are going to do.

We'll go to the next question. Ms. Collins.

Mr. Chair, every day I hear from people who are struggling to pay their bills and to keep a roof over their head. Instead of making sure that Canadians get the help they need, the government has created complicated programs that are still letting people fall through the cracks. If the Prime Minister won't commit to a universal benefit, will he at least commit to removing the restrictive eligibility criteria that are leaving the most vulnerable people behind?

Mr. Chair, we knew, when this pandemic hit, that we needed to help Canadians who were suffering from coast to coast to coast, particularly the most vulnerable. That is why we moved forward rapidly with the Canada emergency response benefit, which has helped over seven million individual Canadians and has made a huge difference. We had to move very quickly to get this money out to people, and that is exactly what we did. We also recognized that there would be a need to do more. That is why since that moment, we have continually worked on reaching out to the most vulnerable and supporting them as well. We have more to do, but we knew that targeted approaches were what was most needed.


We'll go to the next question. Ms. Collins.

Mr. Chair, every day I hear from people who are struggling to pay their bills and to keep a roof over their head. Instead of making sure that Canadians get the help they need, the government has created complicated programs that are still letting people fall through the cracks. If the Prime Minister won't commit to a universal benefit, will he at least commit to removing the restrictive eligibility criteria that are leaving the most vulnerable people behind?

Mr. Chair, we knew, when this pandemic hit, that we needed to help Canadians who were suffering from coast to coast to coast, particularly the most vulnerable. That is why we moved forward rapidly with the Canada emergency response benefit, which has helped over seven million individual Canadians and has made a huge difference. We had to move very quickly to get this money out to people, and that is exactly what we did. We also recognized that there would be a need to do more. That is why since that moment, we have continually worked on reaching out to the most vulnerable and supporting them as well. We have more to do, but we knew that targeted approaches were what was most needed.

Mr. Chair, the government continues to leave people behind. I spoke to a woman in my riding who was homeless last year. She recently found a job and a place to live. However, because she didn't make $5,000 last year, when the pandemic hit she didn't qualify for any benefits. She didn't qualify, but she is one of the people who need it the most. I'm wondering why the Prime Minister doesn't think she deserves our support.


Mr. Chair, every day I hear from people who are struggling to pay their bills and to keep a roof over their head. Instead of making sure that Canadians get the help they need, the government has created complicated programs that are still letting people fall through the cracks. If the Prime Minister won't commit to a universal benefit, will he at least commit to removing the restrictive eligibility criteria that are leaving the most vulnerable people behind?

Mr. Chair, we knew, when this pandemic hit, that we needed to help Canadians who were suffering from coast to coast to coast, particularly the most vulnerable. That is why we moved forward rapidly with the Canada emergency response benefit, which has helped over seven million individual Canadians and has made a huge difference. We had to move very quickly to get this money out to people, and that is exactly what we did. We also recognized that there would be a need to do more. That is why since that moment, we have continually worked on reaching out to the most vulnerable and supporting them as well. We have more to do, but we knew that targeted approaches were what was most needed.

Mr. Chair, the government continues to leave people behind. I spoke to a woman in my riding who was homeless last year. She recently found a job and a place to live. However, because she didn't make $5,000 last year, when the pandemic hit she didn't qualify for any benefits. She didn't qualify, but she is one of the people who need it the most. I'm wondering why the Prime Minister doesn't think she deserves our support.

Mr. Chair, our focus throughout this crisis has been on helping the most vulnerable with targeted measures that will lift Canadians out of poverty and will support them. Over the past five years, we've lifted over a million people out of poverty in this country, and we've continued to put the most vulnerable at the heart of everything we're doing. We will continue to. We've put significant investments forward to charitable organizations and foundations that are helping the most vulnerable. At the same time, we will continue to look for more ways to help even more than the seven million Canadians who successfully receive the CERB. We recognize there's more to do, and we will continue trying to do everything we can in this unprecedented situation.


Mr. Chair, we knew, when this pandemic hit, that we needed to help Canadians who were suffering from coast to coast to coast, particularly the most vulnerable. That is why we moved forward rapidly with the Canada emergency response benefit, which has helped over seven million individual Canadians and has made a huge difference. We had to move very quickly to get this money out to people, and that is exactly what we did. We also recognized that there would be a need to do more. That is why since that moment, we have continually worked on reaching out to the most vulnerable and supporting them as well. We have more to do, but we knew that targeted approaches were what was most needed.

Mr. Chair, the government continues to leave people behind. I spoke to a woman in my riding who was homeless last year. She recently found a job and a place to live. However, because she didn't make $5,000 last year, when the pandemic hit she didn't qualify for any benefits. She didn't qualify, but she is one of the people who need it the most. I'm wondering why the Prime Minister doesn't think she deserves our support.

Mr. Chair, our focus throughout this crisis has been on helping the most vulnerable with targeted measures that will lift Canadians out of poverty and will support them. Over the past five years, we've lifted over a million people out of poverty in this country, and we've continued to put the most vulnerable at the heart of everything we're doing. We will continue to. We've put significant investments forward to charitable organizations and foundations that are helping the most vulnerable. At the same time, we will continue to look for more ways to help even more than the seven million Canadians who successfully receive the CERB. We recognize there's more to do, and we will continue trying to do everything we can in this unprecedented situation.

Mr. Chair, the government is weirdly committed to eligibility criteria that result in regular people not getting the support they need, but not so committed to criteria for corporations and billionaires who get our help. If a company is cheating the public, using offshore tax havens not to pay its fair share, it should not be eligible for government bailouts or benefits. Other countries, like Poland, Denmark and France, have made this commitment, and if they can do it, so can we. The Prime Minister said one thing one day and another the next. Will he commit now that if a company has money in offshore tax havens, it will not receive public funds?


Mr. Chair, the government continues to leave people behind. I spoke to a woman in my riding who was homeless last year. She recently found a job and a place to live. However, because she didn't make $5,000 last year, when the pandemic hit she didn't qualify for any benefits. She didn't qualify, but she is one of the people who need it the most. I'm wondering why the Prime Minister doesn't think she deserves our support.

Mr. Chair, our focus throughout this crisis has been on helping the most vulnerable with targeted measures that will lift Canadians out of poverty and will support them. Over the past five years, we've lifted over a million people out of poverty in this country, and we've continued to put the most vulnerable at the heart of everything we're doing. We will continue to. We've put significant investments forward to charitable organizations and foundations that are helping the most vulnerable. At the same time, we will continue to look for more ways to help even more than the seven million Canadians who successfully receive the CERB. We recognize there's more to do, and we will continue trying to do everything we can in this unprecedented situation.

Mr. Chair, the government is weirdly committed to eligibility criteria that result in regular people not getting the support they need, but not so committed to criteria for corporations and billionaires who get our help. If a company is cheating the public, using offshore tax havens not to pay its fair share, it should not be eligible for government bailouts or benefits. Other countries, like Poland, Denmark and France, have made this commitment, and if they can do it, so can we. The Prime Minister said one thing one day and another the next. Will he commit now that if a company has money in offshore tax havens, it will not receive public funds?

Mr. Chair, the measures we've put forward are focused on helping workers who lose their jobs, regardless of the companies they work for. It is a shame to hear the NDP, which used to be the party of workers, choosing to judge workers by which multinational they work for. We have moved forward with a wage subsidy such that the employers are obliged to pass every single penny on to the workers. That is not help for the companies. That is help for the workers, and that has been our focus all the way through: ordinary Canadians who need support because they are unable to work because of COVID-19. That has been our priority, and that is what Canadians need right now. Of course, we continue to have very strong measures to fight against tax avoidance and tax evasion. We spent a billion dollars to strengthen our  Ms. Laurel Collins: Mr. Chair, can I ask my last question?  Right Hon. Justin Trudeau: We will continue to do that.


Mr. Chair, our focus throughout this crisis has been on helping the most vulnerable with targeted measures that will lift Canadians out of poverty and will support them. Over the past five years, we've lifted over a million people out of poverty in this country, and we've continued to put the most vulnerable at the heart of everything we're doing. We will continue to. We've put significant investments forward to charitable organizations and foundations that are helping the most vulnerable. At the same time, we will continue to look for more ways to help even more than the seven million Canadians who successfully receive the CERB. We recognize there's more to do, and we will continue trying to do everything we can in this unprecedented situation.

Mr. Chair, the government is weirdly committed to eligibility criteria that result in regular people not getting the support they need, but not so committed to criteria for corporations and billionaires who get our help. If a company is cheating the public, using offshore tax havens not to pay its fair share, it should not be eligible for government bailouts or benefits. Other countries, like Poland, Denmark and France, have made this commitment, and if they can do it, so can we. The Prime Minister said one thing one day and another the next. Will he commit now that if a company has money in offshore tax havens, it will not receive public funds?

Mr. Chair, the measures we've put forward are focused on helping workers who lose their jobs, regardless of the companies they work for. It is a shame to hear the NDP, which used to be the party of workers, choosing to judge workers by which multinational they work for. We have moved forward with a wage subsidy such that the employers are obliged to pass every single penny on to the workers. That is not help for the companies. That is help for the workers, and that has been our focus all the way through: ordinary Canadians who need support because they are unable to work because of COVID-19. That has been our priority, and that is what Canadians need right now. Of course, we continue to have very strong measures to fight against tax avoidance and tax evasion. We spent a billion dollars to strengthen our  Ms. Laurel Collins: Mr. Chair, can I ask my last question?  Right Hon. Justin Trudeau: We will continue to do that.

I'm just going to pause the time for a moment. I want to remind honourable members that we're trying to stay within committee rules, which state that the length of a question and the length of an answer should be approximately the same amount of time. I just want to remind our members of that. I'll go back to Ms. Collins. She has about 45 seconds left, and hopefully that's about half and half for the question and the answer. Ms. Collins.


Mr. Chair, the government is weirdly committed to eligibility criteria that result in regular people not getting the support they need, but not so committed to criteria for corporations and billionaires who get our help. If a company is cheating the public, using offshore tax havens not to pay its fair share, it should not be eligible for government bailouts or benefits. Other countries, like Poland, Denmark and France, have made this commitment, and if they can do it, so can we. The Prime Minister said one thing one day and another the next. Will he commit now that if a company has money in offshore tax havens, it will not receive public funds?

Mr. Chair, the measures we've put forward are focused on helping workers who lose their jobs, regardless of the companies they work for. It is a shame to hear the NDP, which used to be the party of workers, choosing to judge workers by which multinational they work for. We have moved forward with a wage subsidy such that the employers are obliged to pass every single penny on to the workers. That is not help for the companies. That is help for the workers, and that has been our focus all the way through: ordinary Canadians who need support because they are unable to work because of COVID-19. That has been our priority, and that is what Canadians need right now. Of course, we continue to have very strong measures to fight against tax avoidance and tax evasion. We spent a billion dollars to strengthen our  Ms. Laurel Collins: Mr. Chair, can I ask my last question?  Right Hon. Justin Trudeau: We will continue to do that.

I'm just going to pause the time for a moment. I want to remind honourable members that we're trying to stay within committee rules, which state that the length of a question and the length of an answer should be approximately the same amount of time. I just want to remind our members of that. I'll go back to Ms. Collins. She has about 45 seconds left, and hopefully that's about half and half for the question and the answer. Ms. Collins.

Thanks so much, Mr. Chair. My last question is about housing and homelessness. My community was facing a crisis long before the pandemic hit, and now people who are living on the streets or in parks don't have the luxury of following public health advice and just staying home. In Victoria, the province and the municipality have stepped up with solutions to house people, at least for the short term, in local hotels. Will the federal government respond to this immediate crisis and provide the needed investments in long-term, stable housing?


Mr. Chair, the measures we've put forward are focused on helping workers who lose their jobs, regardless of the companies they work for. It is a shame to hear the NDP, which used to be the party of workers, choosing to judge workers by which multinational they work for. We have moved forward with a wage subsidy such that the employers are obliged to pass every single penny on to the workers. That is not help for the companies. That is help for the workers, and that has been our focus all the way through: ordinary Canadians who need support because they are unable to work because of COVID-19. That has been our priority, and that is what Canadians need right now. Of course, we continue to have very strong measures to fight against tax avoidance and tax evasion. We spent a billion dollars to strengthen our  Ms. Laurel Collins: Mr. Chair, can I ask my last question?  Right Hon. Justin Trudeau: We will continue to do that.

I'm just going to pause the time for a moment. I want to remind honourable members that we're trying to stay within committee rules, which state that the length of a question and the length of an answer should be approximately the same amount of time. I just want to remind our members of that. I'll go back to Ms. Collins. She has about 45 seconds left, and hopefully that's about half and half for the question and the answer. Ms. Collins.

Thanks so much, Mr. Chair. My last question is about housing and homelessness. My community was facing a crisis long before the pandemic hit, and now people who are living on the streets or in parks don't have the luxury of following public health advice and just staying home. In Victoria, the province and the municipality have stepped up with solutions to house people, at least for the short term, in local hotels. Will the federal government respond to this immediate crisis and provide the needed investments in long-term, stable housing?

The right honourable Prime Minister, in 25 seconds or less, please.