Read on Twitter
The #SenCA continues to debate #BillC7 An Act to amend the Criminal Code (medical assistance in dying) today. I will be speaking shortly. #Cdnpoli Watch live: https://senparlvu.parl.gc.ca/Harmony/en/PowerBrowser/PowerBrowserV2?fk=10551972&globalStreamId=3
/1
/1
I am very grateful that this chamber has demonstrated empathy and respect for one another’s opinions as we deliberate these difficult issues. /2
Under this proposed legislation, doctors have warned us that we are placing assisted suicide as simply part of a range of good medical care options. However, this is not just another option. This is the final option, and it is irreversible. /3
We were warned by some of the experts most familiar with international assisted suicide regimes to proceed with great caution, especially in the context of one of the most troubling clauses of #BillC7. /4
The idea that we would be opening this regime further & expanding assisted suicide to those w disabilities and chronic illness who are not approaching end of life, before we have taken action to prevent coercion, such as in the case of Roger Foley, is preposterous. /5
#BillC7 expands access to assisted suicide to Canadians with disabilities who are not approaching end of life. The response from the disability community has been powerful and staggering, and yet, ignored by the Government. /6
Every single national disability organization in the country is opposed to #BillC7. In fact, 72 organizations who serve Canadians with disabilities signed a public letter urging the government to appeal the Truchon decision./7
They gave several reasons why a failure to appeal would be disastrous for the disability community: “the decision will entrench stereotypes & exacerbate stigma for Canadians with disabilities, contributing to the adversity & oppression experienced by this vulnerable group”./8
As the Executive Vice-President of Inclusion Canada, Krista Carr said, “Our biggest fear has always been that having a disability would become an acceptable reason for state-provided suicide”. She continued, “Bill C-7 is our worst nightmare”. /9
I want to thank the disability community for their advocacy, and I want them to know that they have been heard. /10
This legislation creates a two-track system with two sets of safeguards depending on whether death is reasonably foreseeable or whether it is not reasonably foreseeable. /11
The Government has removed the 10-day reflection period in the current regime. This is absolutely unjustifiable. /12
Even former Attorney General Jody Wilson-Raybould expressed great concern with the Government seemingly ignoring the instruction of the Supreme Court of Canada in the Carter decision - both with respect to stringent safeguards and the need for clear consent. /13
The Government has clearly abandoned these directives from the Supreme Court, by pre-emptively eliminating the most important safeguards, and by allowing final consent to be waived. /14
Many physicians have ethical concerns with actively participating in an individual’s death, especially if they are of the professional opinion that there are other treatment options available. /15
As the Canadian Medical Association put it, so aptly during our discussion of C-14, “an effective referral is essentially an endorsement of a procedure. That is morally problematic for many practitioners.”/ 16
With this legislation putting assisted suicide on equal footing with other therapeutic treatment options, now, more than ever, physicians are asking for protection./ 17
And again, while some have tried to frame this as a religious freedom issue, that would be missing the point and only accounting for a portion of concerned practitioners. / 18
While we did hear this request from orgs representing a variety of faiths, we also heard from bio-ethicists, family-care physicians, psychiatrists & palliative care physicians that a duty to refer, against their professional judgement, would pose overwhelming distress /19
Many Indigenous witnesses raised the concept of cultural safety. Marilee Nowgesic, Executive Director of the Canadian Indigenous Nurses Assocation said: “Are they going to be punished because they didn’t execute their duty as a nurse?... /20
...or will they be punished by the community people for taking a life? That is why we are trying to say, put a pause on this situation until comprehensive consultation can be done.” /21
This is a concern for many Indigenous practitioners and now, more than ever, we need to ensure the concept of cultural safety is a paramount consideration. /22
Shamefully, the Government did not engage in meaningful consultation with Indigenous peoples. Perhaps if they had, they would have had a better understanding of the serious concerns of Indigenous communities prior to drafting this legislation. /23
In fact, the Government did not consult whatsoever with Inuit or Metis, choosing to abandon their duty to consult on the most critical issue we will likely ever vote upon. /24
Overarching concern raised by witnesses at pre-study was that we are not offering most Cdns who qualify for assisted suicide a fair and honest choice between life and death, both in the context of supports for those living with disability or chronic illness & palliative care./25
By moving to broaden access to assisted suicide before we improve these systems, we are making it easier to die than to live. /26
We heard from the Canadian Society of Palliative Care Physicians that, quote: “the lack of access to palliative care in Canada is a national tragedy”. /27
A Nov 2020 study, examined palliative care involvement in patients requesting assisted suicide & found it to be wholly inadequate. This study says: 2/3 of patients had no community palliative care physician & 40% had no palliative care involvement prior to requesting death./28
Without access to high-quality palliative care in a timely manner, patients who are suffering may believe that assisted suicide is their only option. /29
I cannot stress enough how unethical and immoral it is to increase access to assisted suicide before we have guaranteed access to palliative care for any Canadian who requires it. /30
The committee heard about Canadians who have requested assisted suicide due to loneliness, depression, social deprivation and lack of supports needed for living. We know that #COVID19 has amplified these problems. /31
However, Minister Lametti has decided to cavalierly dismiss all these concerns and rather chock up the widespread opposition to this bill to a “religious right” who cannot be controlled. /32
Putting aside the offensive characterization of people of faith as a fringe group that needs to be controlled, the Minister knows full well that this bill has been condemned by most experts who testified at committee, physicians, International experts,… /33
… the disability community, Indigenous organizations, constitutional experts, the former Attorney General who implemented Carter, and in fact, members of his own caucus. /34
Instead he would rather hide this horribly flawed legislation behind a blatant mischaracterization and perpetuate his party’s belief that people of faith are to be discounted and dismissed. /35
Min Lametti is well aware that none of the major issues w #BillC7 are based on religious grounds, & yet he finds another opportunity to insult ppl of faith. All that faith groups have been advocating for is for adequate conscience protections for physicians & practitioners. / 36
Minister Lametti, after blaming the “religious right” for this time crunch, is now telling the #SenCA to essentially ignore what we have heard and, quote: “put our shoulders to the wheel” and get this passed by Friday. /37
Let’s take a look at the timeline: In September 2019, the Quebec Superior Court struck down the clause that death must be reasonably foreseeable. Minister Lametti did not appeal this decision. /38
The Court gave the Trudeau Government until March 2020 to revise the law. Six whole months. Ministers Lametti & Hajdu tabled Bill C-7 on the last week of February. As they were already running out of time, they asked the Court for a four-month extension to July 2020. /39
Their letter said that an extension would quote: “give Parliament time to consider and enact proposed amendments”. This extension was granted. Then as we got closer to July, the Government asked for another extension, this time a six-month extension, citing the pandemic. /40
This extension was granted, bringing the new deadline to December 18th, 2020. The Govt then prorogued #parliament to cover up their own #scandal, and as a result, killed their bill. Then, after parliament returns, it took them a week and a half to table identical legislation. /41
This happened on October 5, 2020 - more than two months ago now. They sent this bill to the #SenCA late last week and publicly call upon us to rush through this life and death legislation in a few days. /42
It is truly appalling for a Minister to put public pressure on the Senate to rubber stamp legislation that is fundamentally flawed, and in my view, unpassable. /43
This comes after his previous extension requests in which he asks the Court to give #parliament time to consider & enact proposed amendments. The #SenCA already did a pre-study of this bill in order to accommodate the Govt’s inept time management, & this is how they respond. /44
Last Friday, Minister Lametti asked for an extension, yet this time the request is remarkably shorter, demonstrating his lack of respect for this chamber. /45
He requested an extension only until the end of February, which would give the #SenCa three sitting weeks to debate the bill, study the bill at committee, consider amendments, vote on amendments, and send the bill back to the House. /46
I suppose he figures it will not take very long to dismiss all the work of this chamber and reject our amendments, as they have done consistently. /47
The Minister’s letter requesting a deadline extension states: “While there is a Govt Representative in the Senate, there is no Senate caucus affiliated to the party forming government, which makes it difficult to predict the timeline of the Bill passing through the #SenCa.”/48
Essentially, he is saying that the Independent senators exercising their independence on this critical legislation is posing a problem for his Government’s unreasonable timeline. /49
The blame for not meeting the deadline does not rest w the INDEP senators who are simply doing their jobs by scrutinizing this #BillC7. It also does not rest w CPC MPs who dared to rise on debate at 3rd reading. The blame for another missed deadline lies squarely w this Govt. /50
Then, the Trudeau Govt, through Senator Gold, presents a plan of action – one that would be laughable if it were not so disturbing, given the subject matter we are debating. /51
This timeline was a slap in the face to the Cdns who have testified, who have been writing to us, calling our offices, & advocating for vulnerable Cdns. This Chamber has never & I sincerely hope will never spend 1 week debating the circumstances in which Canadians live & die. /52
And, certainly not after the heart-wrenching testimony we heard from those most affected. I am very pleased to hear that Senator Gold has reconsidered and understands that this bill will not be voted on at third reading by Friday. /53
