2019-02-20 19:28 House intervention / intervention en chambre

Digital divide, Rural communities, Rural development, Safety, Small communities

Communautés rurales, Développement rural, Fossé numérique, Motions émanant des députés, Petites collectivités, Sécurité publique,

Mr. Speaker, in 1983, my parents had an Osborne laptop with a detachable keyboard, a four-inch screen and dual five-and-a-quarter-inch floppy disk drives that could read 90-kilobyte disks.

In 1987, their company, Immeubles Doncaster in Saint-Agathe-des-Monts, got one of the first fax machines in the region. Since Bell Canada did not know quite what to do with this new technology, it gave every company nearly identical fax numbers. One company's fax number was 326-8819, ours was 326-8829, and another company's was 326-8839. I do not know what we would have done if there had been more fax machines.

Around 1988, my father had a Cantel car phone installed in his 1985 Chevette. The phone cost almost as much as the car. It had to be installed semi-permanently in the trunk with an antenna attached to the rear window. We always had the latest technology at home. We got email when it was first introduced to the market by CompuServe in the 1990s. We were able to communicate with other users through a dial-up connection. We had to make a long-distance call to Montreal to get it to work, but it worked. I still have our first family email address memorized. It was 76171.1725@compuserve.com.

Analog cell service was good enough to meet our needs. The signal dropped from time to time, but we could make calls. With our antenna, we could listen to CBC and Radio-Canada radio stations fairly well and watch a few television channels. To change the channel, my father would climb the ladder and turn the antenna with pliers, and we would use two-way radios to tell him when the signal came in.

We lived in a rural area, in Sainte-Lucie-des-Laurentides. That is where I grew up and where I still live today. My family was fully connected to the latest technology. Life was good. At the end of 1994, the digital divide had not yet affected the regions entirely.

Fast forward to 2000, the Internet was still on dial-up. The first satellite services had not yet arrived. I moved to Ontario to study computer science at the University of Guelph. I had learned Linux in high school and was involved in the freeware community. I found Rogers cable high-speed Internet readily available. Bell DSL followed a few years later, and at that time I switched over to a small reseller named Magma Communications. In 2004, I was living in a city where high-speed Internet was available, while Xplornet satellite service was starting up in the regions. My parents subscribed to the service after a year of suffering with Internet through ExpressVu, which used dial-up to send and satellite to receive. The digital divide was huge.

In 2001, my family and I visited my grandfather's childhood home in Turkey. When we arrived at Atatürk Airport, I heard cellphones around me going: dot-dot-dot-dash-dash-dot-dot-dot. I knew Morse code, so I wondered what an SMS was and why we did not have them back home. When we returned, my grandfather gave me my first cellphone, a digital analog Qualcomm through Telus.

As I am involved in the world of freeware, as an administrator of IRC networks and a journalist in the sector, I need the power to communicate with colleagues around the world. While everyone was texting internationally, my Telus phone could not send a text outside its own network. When I called customer service, I was told to use the web browser on my phone, which barely worked, and to go the website of the company that provided service to the person to whom I wanted to send a text message, and to use their form.

I did not remain a Telus customer for long. I quickly switched to Microcell, a cell company on the GSM worldwide network, which operated under the name Fido and offered the ability to send and receive texts internationally, except with its competitors in Canada. The problem with Fido was that the service was only available in cities. It was not profitable to install towers in rural areas. When I travelled, I could only communicate in the Toronto and Montreal metropolitan areas.

The digital divide also affected telephone service. In 2003, I purchased a PCMCIA card for my laptop. For $50 a month, I had unlimited Internet access on something called the GPRS platform. It was not quick, but it worked. That service also worked in the U.S. at no additional cost. With that technology, I wrote a little program connecting the maritime GPS in my server in order to create a web page tracking my movements with just a few seconds' delay.

In November 2004, Rogers bought Fido and, for an additional fee, provided service in the regions served by Rogers. After that, the Rogers-Fido GPRS system began cutting out after being connected for precisely 12 minutes, except in the Ottawa area, where it did not cut out. Was that so that the legislators in the capital would not notice? Thus began my mistrust in large telecommunications companies.

In 2006 I attended my brother Jonah and sister-in-law Tracy's wedding in Nairobi. After the wedding, our whole family went on safari. In the middle of the Maasai Mara, cellphones worked properly. That was an “a-ha” moment for me.

By 2006, after the digital shift, the cellular service we had in the Laurentians in the 1980s had almost completely disappeared. We were regressing as the digital divide grew wider.

Today, in 2019, I have boosters on both of my cars. At home, we have a booster on the roof to help us get by. What is more, our wireless Internet is expensive, slow and unreliable.

Many communities in my riding of Laurentides—Labelle still do not have any cell service. Telecommunications companies plan to do away with long-standing pager services, which will no longer exist in Canada by next summer. Dial-up, satellite and wireless Internet is available in the region, but it is slow and unreliable.

There is no obvious solution. As a result of spectrum auctions and spectrum management, small companies and local co-operatives cannot access the cell market to fill in those gaps. What is more, the large corporations do not want to see new stakeholders enter the market, even though they are not interested in resolving the issue themselves.

That is causing major problems. Our economic growth is suffering, young people are leaving and businesses and self-employed workers are reluctant to set up shop in the region. Emergency services have to find creative ways of communicating with first responders, volunteer firefighters.

The situation is critical. The study we are talking about in Motion No. 208 is so urgent that I would ask the Standing Committee on Industry, Science and Technology, of which I am a member, not to wait for this motion moved by my colleague from Pontiac to be adopted before beginning its study.

In closing, I would like to read the resolution that I received last week from one of the fire departments in my riding, which urged me to do something about the cell service in the region. They used the example of the Vendée community. Bell Canada is a company that was initially largely funded by the Crown. However, it has completely lost its social conscience. Bell offered to help the community only if the municipality covered 100% of the cost to install a telecommunication tower even though the Bell Canada Act states:

The works of the Company are hereby declared to be works for the general advantage of Canada.

Here is resolution 2019-01-256 in its entirety:

WHEREAS the Northwest Laurentians Fire Department, composed of the territories of the municipalities of the townships of Amherst, Arundel, Huberdeau, La Conception, Lac-Supérieur, La Minerve, Montcalm and Saint-Faustin-Lac—Carré, was created following the signing of an intermunicipal agreement for the organization, operation and administration of a fire service;

WHEREAS the municipality of Amherst, Vendée sector, has been experiencing various problems and deficiencies with cellphone coverage for more than two (2) years;

WHEREAS the pager technology used by firefighters and first responders will no longer be supported as of June;

WHEREAS the only technology that is supported and used by the Fire Department is cellphone technology;

WHEREAS the Vendée sector has close to 1,000 permanent and/or seasonal residents who are being deprived of adequate public safety services;

WHEREAS 80% of the population of Vendée consists of retirees and this demographic is more likely to need emergency services;

WHEREAS the Fire Department has approached Bell Canada and the federal member of Parliament [for Laurentides—Labelle] on this matter;

WHEREAS in 2017 and 2018, the municipality of Amherst approached the federal MP [for Laurentides—Labelle], the then MNA Sylvain Pagé, the department of public safety, the Sûreté du Québec, Bell Canada and the RCM of Laurentides on this matter;

WHEREAS the situation has reached a critical point for public safety for these residents;

THEREFORE it is moved by Steve Perreault, seconded by Richard Pépin, and unanimously resolved by the members present;

THAT the board of directors of the Fire Department support the actions of the municipality of Amherst.

THAT the board of directors call on the federal government, via the member for Laurentides—Labelle...to intercede with the authorities responsible for the public telephone network to require the implementation of cellular service in the Vendée sector by companies operating in this field.

ADOPTED at the meeting of January 17, 2019

We have work to do, and we cannot wait any longer. Companies are putting the lives of my constituents and rural Canadians at risk. That is unacceptable. 5G is not a magic bullet that will fix everything.

We need to take serious action, starting with this study.

Monsieur le Président, en 1983, mes parents avaient un ordinateur portatif de type Osborne, avec un clavier détachable, donnant accès à un écran de quatre pouces et à deux lecteurs de disquettes de cinq pouces et quart capables de lire des disquettes de 90 kilo-octets chacune.

En 1987, leur entreprise, les Immeubles Doncaster de Saint-Agathe-des-Monts, a eu un des premiers télécopieurs de la région. Bell Canada, ne sachant pas entièrement quoi faire avec cette nouvelle technologie, a donné à chaque entreprise un numéro de télécopieur presque identique. Une entreprise avait le numéro de télécopieur 326-8819. Nous avions le 326-8829. Le numéro de télécopieur suivant était le 326-8839. On ne sait pas ce qu'on aurait fait s'il y en avait eu plus.

Vers 1988, mon père a fait installer un téléphone cellulaire de Cantel dans sa Chevette 1985. Le téléphone avait coûté presque autant que l'automobile. Il devait être installé presque en permanence dans le coffre et une antenne était collée à la fenêtre arrière. Chez nous, nous étions toujours à l'avant-garde de la technologie. Nous avons commencé quand le premier service de courriel a été offert au grand marché, par CompuServe, dans les années 1990. Nous étions capables de communiquer avec les autres usagers par accès commuté. On devait faire un appel interurbain à Montréal pour que cela fonctionne, mais cela fonctionnait. Notre première adresse de courriel familiale demeure profondément inscrite dans ma tête. C'était 76171.1725@compuserve.com.

Le service cellulaire en mode analogique fonctionnait assez bien pour répondre à nos besoins. Il coupait de temps en temps, mais nous pouvions faire des appels. CBC et Radio-Canada entraient plus ou moins bien sur nos antennes de radios, mais nous étions capables d'écouter quelques postes de télévision. Pour changer de poste, mon père montait sur l'échelle et tournait l'antenne avec des pinces pendant qu'on lui disait par radio portable quand le signal entrait.

Nous vivions dans une région rurale, à Sainte-Lucie-des-Laurentides. C'est là où j'ai grandi et c'est là que je demeure aujourd'hui. Ma famille était pleinement branchée aux technologies du jour. La vie était belle. À la fin de 1994, la fracture numérique n'avait pas encore complètement touché les régions.

Avançons à l'an 2000. En région, Internet entrait toujours par accès commuté. Les premiers services de satellite n'étaient pas encore arrivés. Moi, j'étais parti en Ontario pour poursuivre mes études en informatique à l'Université de Guelph. J'avais appris le système d'opération Linux au secondaire et j'étais pleinement dans la communauté des logiciels libres. J'avais trouvé Internet haute vitesse par câble de Rogers facilement disponible. Le DSL de Bell a suivi quelques années plus tard et, à son arrivée, j'ai changé pour un petit revendeur qui s'appelait Magma Communications. En 2004, j'étais en ville, là où Internet haute vitesse illimité était disponible, pendant que le service de satellite Xplornet commençait en région. Mes parents s'y sont abonnés après un an de misère sur Internet par ExpressVu, qui fasait les envois par accès commuté alors que la réception se faisait par satellite. La fracture numérique frappait de plein fouet.

Revenons en 2001, quand ma famille en moi avons visité les lieux d'enfance de mon grand-père en Turquie. En arrivant à l'Aéroport Atatürk, j'ai vu que les cellulaires autour de moi émettaient ce qui suit: point-point-point-tiret-tiret-point-point-point. Connaissant déjà le code morse, je me suis demandé ce qu'était un SMS et pourquoi cela n'existait pas chez nous. À notre retour, mon grand-père m'a offert mon premier téléphone cellulaire, un Qualcomm numérique analogique, relié à Telus.

Vu mon implication dans le monde du logiciel libre, comme administrateur de réseaux IRC et journaliste dans le secteur, j'avais besoin de pouvoir communiquer avec des collègues de partout au monde. Pendant que le monde entier échangeait des textos entre les pays, mon téléphone de Telus n'était pas capable d'envoyer un texto à l'extérieur de son propre réseau. Quand j'ai appelé le service à la clientèle, on m'a dit d'utiliser le navigateur Web sur le téléphone, qui marchait à peine, pour aller sur le site Web de la compagnie à laquelle celui à qui je voulais envoyer un message texte était abonné, pour utiliser son formulaire.

Je ne suis pas resté longtemps avec Telus. J'ai vite changé pour Microcell, une compagnie cellulaire sur le réseau mondial GSM, qui opérait sous le nom de Fido et qui offrait la capacité d'échanger des textos avec le reste du monde, sauf ses concurrents au Canada. Sauf qu'avec Fido, le service fonctionnait seulement dans les villes. Installer des tours en région n'était pas rentable. Quand je voyageais, je pouvais donc seulement communiquer dans les grandes régions de Toronto et de Montréal.

La fracture numérique n'avait pas oublié la téléphonie. En 2003, j'ai acheté une carte PCMCIA pour mon ordinateur portable. Cela me donnait accès, pour 50 $ par mois, à Internet illimité sur le protocole qu'on appelait GPRS. Ce n'était pas vite, mais cela fonctionnait. Ce service fonctionnait également aux États-Unis, sans frais supplémentaires. Avec cette technologie, j'ai écrit un petit programme pour brancher le GPS maritime dans mon serveur afin de créer une page Web de mes déplacements avec un délai de quelques secondes.

En novembre 2004, Rogers a acheté Fido et nous a permis, pour des frais supplémentaires, d'avoir le service dans les régions desservies par Rogers. Ensuite, le système de GPRS de Rogers-Fido a commencé à couper après exactement 12 minutes de connexion, sauf dans la région d'Ottawa, où il n'arrêtait pas. Est-ce que c'était pour passer inaperçu auprès des législateurs de la capitale? Ma méfiance envers les grandes compagnies de télécommunications commença.

En 2006, j'ai assisté au mariage de mon frère Jonah et de sa femme Tracy à Nairobi. Après le mariage, nous avons fait un safari en famille. En plein milieu du Masai Mara, les téléphones cellulaires fonctionnaient comme il le faut. Cela a été pour moi un moment révélateur.

À la suite du virage numérique, le service cellulaire que nous avions dans les Laurentides pendant les années 1980 avait presque complètement disparu, en 2006. Nous reculions, la fracture numérique s'accélérant à toute vitesse.

Aujourd'hui, en 2019, mes deux automobiles ont des suramplificateurs. À la maison, nous avons un suramplificateur sur le toit pour nous dépanner. De plus, notre service Internet est sans fil, lent, peu fiable et cher.

Dans ma circonscription, Laurentides—Labelle, plusieurs communautés demeurent sans aucun service cellulaire. Les compagnies de télécommunications annulent et ferment les services de téléavertisseurs et, d'ici l'été prochain, ce service de longue date n'existera plus au Canada. On accède à l'Internet par accès commuté, par satellite ou par sans-fil. Il est lent et peu fiable pour la majorité de mes concitoyens.

Les solutions ne sont pas évidentes. Les encans de spectre et la gestion des ondes font en sorte que les petites compagnies et les coopératives locales ne peuvent pas accéder au marché cellulaire pour combler ces lacunes. De plus, les grandes compagnies ne sont pas enthousiastes à l'idée de voir de nouveaux acteurs, même si elles ne sont pas intéressées à régler le problème.

Cela cause des problèmes majeurs: notre croissance économique est attaquée; les jeunes sont incités à partir; et les entreprises et les travailleurs autonomes ne sont pas enclins à s'installer en région. Les services d'urgence doivent trouver des manières créatives de communiquer avec les premiers répondants, les pompiers volontaires.

La situation est critique. L'étude que nous abordons dans la motion M-208 est tellement urgente que je demanderais au Comité permanent de l'industrie, des sciences et de la technologie, auquel je siège, de ne pas attendre que cette motion de mon collègue de Pontiac soit adoptée pour commencer son étude.

En terminant, j'aimerais lire la résolution que j'ai reçue la semaine dernière d'une des régies d'incendie de ma circonscription, qui m'implorait de régler la question du service cellulaire en région. Ils ont utilisé l'exemple de la communauté de Vendée. Bell Canada est une compagnie initialement largement financée par la Couronne. Cependant, elle a complètement perdu sa conscience sociale. Bell a offert d'aider la communauté seulement si la municipalité assumait 100 % des coûts d'installation d'une tour de télécommunication, et ce, malgré cette phrase dans la Loi sur Bell Canada:

Les ouvrages de la Compagnie sont déclarés à l’avantage général du Canada.

Voici la résolution intégrale 2019-01-256:

CONSIDERANT la création de la Régie incendie Nord-Ouest Laurentides, composée des territoires des municipalités du canton d'Amherst, du canton d'Arundel, d'Huberdeau, de La Conception, de Lac-Supérieur, de La Minerve, de Montcalm et de Saint-Faustin-Lac—Carré, et ce, suite à la signature d'une entente inter municipale ayant pour objet l'organisation, l'opération et l'administration d'un service de protection contre les incendies;

CONSIDERANT QUE depuis plus de deux (2) ans, la municipalité d'Amherst secteur Vendée manifeste différentes problématiques et manquement au niveau de la téléphonie cellulaire;

CONSIDERANT QUE la technologie des téléavertisseurs utilisée par les pompiers et premiers répondants ne sera plus supportée à compter du mois de juin prochain;

CONSIDERANT QUE la seule technologie supportée et utilisée par la Régie incendie est la téléphonie cellulaire;

CONSIDERANT QUE le secteur de Vendée comporte près de 1 000 résidents et/ou villégiateurs qui sont privés de service adéquat quant à la sécurité publique;

CONSIDERANT QUE 80 % de la clientèle de Vendée sont des retraités et que ceux-ci représentent une clientèle plus à risque de devoir utiliser les services d'urgences;

CONSIDERANT QUE la Régie a fait des représentations auprès de la compagnie Bell Canada et du député fédéral [de Laurentides—Labelle];

CONSIDERANT QUE la municipalité d'Amherst a fait des représentations en 2017 et 2018 auprès du député fédéral [de Laurentides—Labelle], le député provincial de l'époque Monsieur Sylvain Pagé, le ministère de la sécurité publique, la sureté du Québec, la compagnie Bell Canada et la MRC des Laurentides;

CONSIDERANT QUE la situation est alarmante pour la sécurité publique de ces citoyens;

POUR CES MOTIFS, il est proposé par monsieur Steve Perreault, appuyé par monsieur Richard Pépin, et résolu unanimement des membres présents;

QUE le conseil d'administration de la Régie incendie appuie la municipalité d'Amherst dans ses démarches.

QUE le conseil d'administration demande au gouvernement fédéral via son député Laurentides—Labelle [...] d'intervenir auprès des responsables du réseau public de téléphonie afin d'exiger l'implantation de la téléphonie cellulaire dans le secteur de Vendée auprès des entreprises œuvrant dans le domaine.

ADOPTÉE à la séance du 17 janvier 2019

Nous avons du travail à faire et nous ne pouvons plus attendre. Ce sont les vies de mes concitoyens et celles des Canadiens des régions que les compagnies mettent en jeu. C'est inacceptable. Le 5G n'est pas une pilule magique qui va tout régler.

Nous devons agir sérieusement, et cela commence avec cette étude.

Watch | Hansard

Ecoutez | Hansard

foss hansard parlchmbr tv 3344 words - read the full entry at permanent link - comments: 0. Posted at 20:26 on February 20, 2019

2019-02-20 14:14 House intervention / intervention en chambre

Charitable organizations, Health and social services, Laurentides, Statements by Members,

Déclarations de députés, Laurentides, Oeuvres de bienfaisance, Santé et services sociaux,

Mr. Speaker, this year marks the 30th anniversary of the Fondation médicale des Laurentides et des Pays-d'en-Haut.

The foundation serves 32 municipalities along with several establishments and resources, and has invested more than $9.5 million in medical equipment and local health care services.

An organization is only as successful as the people behind it. I want to acknowledge the commitment of the founders and the past and current presidents: Christian Gélinas, François Bertrand, Louis Tourangeau, Marc Desforges, Raymond Douillard, Pierre Forget, Marie-Pier Fournier, Peter Hamé, Lise Hétu, Laurent Tremblay, Lise Forget-Therrien, the late Marc Desjardins, Michel Frenette, Justin Racette, Nancy Wilson and Michel Rochon.

I also want to acknowledge all those who, over the years, have helped create a big family of full-time employees and volunteers who are dedicated to the community.

We can be proud of these individuals, for they have taught us that, when it comes to taking care of your health, if you want to go fast, go alone; if you want to go far, go together.

Monsieur le Président, cette année marque le 30e anniversaire de la Fondation médicale des Laurentides et des Pays-d'en-Haut.

La fondation couvre 32 municipalités, sert plusieurs établissements et ressources et a investi plus de 9,5 millions de dollars dans des équipements médicaux et dans des services de santé de proximité.

Ce sont les gens qui font le succès d'un organisme. Je salue l'engagement des membres fondateurs ainsi que des présidents passés et actuel: Christian Gélinas, François Bertrand, Louis Tourangeau, Marc Desforges, Raymond Douillard, Pierre Forget, Marie-Pier Fournier, Peter Hamé, Lise Hétu, Laurent Tremblay, Lise Forget-Therrien, feu Marc Desjardins, Michel Frenette, Justin Racette, Nancy Wilson et Michel Rochon.

Je salue aussi toutes celles et ceux qui se sont investis au fil des ans dans la formation d'une grande famille d'employés permanents et de bénévoles dévoués à la communauté.

Ces gens nous rendent fiers parce qu'ils démontrent que, lorsque vient le temps de veiller à notre santé, seul, on va vite, mais ensemble, on va loin.

Watch | Hansard

Ecoutez | Hansard

hansard parlchmbr statements tv 359 words - read the full entry at permanent link - comments: 0. Posted at 20:26 on February 20, 2019

2019-02-19 RNNR 128

Standing Committee on Natural Resources

(1535)

[English]

The Chair (Mr. James Maloney (Etobicoke—Lakeshore, Lib.)):

Good afternoon, everybody. Welcome back. I hope everybody had an enjoyable and interesting break week or non-sitting week.

We have two groups of witnesses with us for the first hour. From Oxfam Canada, we have Mr. Ian Thomson.

Thank you, sir, for joining us.

From the Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission, we have Rumina Velshi and Liane Sauer.

You probably all know the process. Each group will be given up to 10 minutes for a presentation, and after both of you have completed your presentations, we will open the floor to questions from around the table.

Since you've been waiting patiently, why don't the two of you start?

Ms. Rumina Velshi (President and Chief Executive Officer, Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission):

Thank you.[Translation]

Good afternoon, Mr. Chair and members of the committee.

My name is Rumina Velshi. I am the President and Chief Executive Officer of the Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission.[English]

I am joined this morning by Liane Sauer, director general of the strategic planning directorate at the CNSC.

Before beginning my remarks, I would like to acknowledge that the land on which we gather is the traditional unceded territory of the Algonquin people.

Thank you for inviting me to provide comments on best practices for engaging with indigenous communities regarding major energy projects.

Before giving you my thoughts on that subject, I will provide a bit of background about our organization.

The CNSC is Canada's nuclear life-cycle regulator and is responsible for regulating everything nuclear in Canada. Our mandate is, one, for the protection of health, safety, security and the environment; two, to respect Canada's international obligations on the peaceful use of nuclear energy; and three, to disseminate information to the public. It is a clear mandate and one that we have fulfilled faithfully for over 70 years.

The commission is an independent quasi-judicial tribunal, comprised of up to seven members, that makes licensing and environmental assessment decisions for major nuclear facilities and activities.

Canada's nuclear sector is broad and ranges from uranium mining, nuclear reactors, nuclear medicine and industrial applications of nuclear technology to the safe management of nuclear waste. Our focus is safety at all times; however, we have many priorities. One of our top priorities is ensuring the meaningful participation of indigenous peoples in our processes.

During my six years as a commission member, I have had the opportunity to hear the perspectives of many different indigenous peoples and leaders during commission proceedings. Now, as president, I'm committed to meet with indigenous community leaders with a view to further enhance the CNSC's relationship-building efforts.

As an agent of the Crown, the CNSC fully embraces its responsibilities respecting engagement and consultation. Those responsibilities include acting honourably in all interactions with indigenous peoples. This means that we appropriately consult on, and accommodate when necessary, indigenous rights and interests when our regulatory decisions may adversely impact them. That is a responsibility we take very seriously.

We have mechanisms in place to ensure that indigenous peoples are consulted on projects that might have an impact on their rights. One important consultation mechanism is the commission's public hearing process. Leading up to a hearing, and beginning very early in a project, CNSC staff meet with potentially impacted indigenous communities to better understand potential impacts and identify ways to avoid, reduce or mitigate them.

Applicants are intimately involved in that process as well, whether in concert with CNSC staff, or separate from them. In fact, we have had a regulatory document in place since 2016, REGDOC-3.2.2, Aboriginal Engagement, which sets out various requirements and guidance for applicants. For example, applicants are required, before an application for a major project is even submitted, to identify potentially impacted indigenous communities and meaningfully engage with them throughout the process.

The outcome of those consultation and engagement activities, and any measures taken or committed to, are then presented to the commission in an open and transparent public hearing. During these hearings, CNSC staff, applicants and indigenous peoples each present to the commission. The commission considers all information presented, and before making a licensing decision, satisfies itself that what is required to uphold the honour of the Crown and to discharge any applicable duty to consult has been done.

We have recently published on our website a compendium of indigenous consultation and engagement best practices, which I have provided to this committee. It builds on our experiences with indigenous communities, as well as those of federal, provincial and international counterparts.

I have mentioned our regulatory document and meaningful participation in commission public hearings, but there are a few other practices that I would like to highlight as well.

Having a mechanism to assist indigenous groups with financial capacity to participate is key. We have a flexible and responsive participant funding program or PFP that we administer and that is funded by licensees. The PFP supports the participation of indigenous peoples as well as other eligible recipients in our regulatory processes. Recently it has been expanded to support indigenous knowledge and traditional land use studies, which will provide important information for the commission to consider in its deliberations.

The PFP also directly supports several other best practices, one of which is multi-party meetings. These meetings bring together indigenous groups, CNSC staff, licensees or applicants, and other governmental representatives, when appropriate, so many issues can be heard and addressed at once. These meetings are often held in indigenous communities, and they allow CNSC staff to get a better perspective of the issues of interest or concern to community members and their leadership. The PFP also supports participation in commission meetings, which are non-licensing proceedings.

The commission has recently decided to provide indigenous intervenors the opportunity to make oral submissions, whereas other intervenors are invited to make written submissions only. That decision was made in recognition of the indigenous oral tradition for sharing knowledge and in the spirit of reconciliation.

The PFP can also be used to support participation in our independent environmental monitoring program or IEMP, which is another best practice. Our IEMP takes environmental samples from public areas around nuclear facilities to independently verify whether the public and the environment are safe. In recent years we have supported the participation of indigenous peoples in sampling activities under the program, including the design of sampling campaigns so it reflects their values and interests.

A final best practice I would like to mention is the CNSC's ongoing engagement throughout the life of nuclear facilities and activities, not just during the licensing phase.

We are committed to building long-term, positive relationships with indigenous communities with a direct interest in nuclear facilities or on whose territory nuclear facilities or activities are found.

As a life-cycle regulator we want to understand all issues of interest or concern and work to address anything that is within our authority throughout the life of a project. We are committed to that and are currently implementing a long-term indigenous engagement strategy with 33 indigenous groups who represent 90 indigenous communities in eight regions in Canada. We welcome the opportunity to partner and work with these groups for many years to come.

I believe we are on a journey in Canada as we continue to explore how best to engage indigenous peoples in relation to major energy projects. Expectations and best practices are evolving, and it is critical that we continue to stay abreast of these developments. We have learned many lessons over time and continue to learn. We value and are committed to long-lasting and positive relationships with indigenous peoples in Canada and look forward to continuing to work together in the spirit of respect and reconciliation. This is how we will move forward together.

Thank you.

(1540)

The Chair:

Thank you.

Mr. Thomson.

Mr. Ian Thomson (Policy Specialist, Extractive Industries, Oxfam Canada):

Good afternoon, committee members. Thank you for inviting Oxfam Canada to be part of this study today.

I'd like to join my fellow witness in acknowledging the Algonquin territory on which we're meeting.

My name is Ian Thomson. I'm a policy specialist with Oxfam Canada focused on the extractive industries.

Oxfam in an international NGO. We're active in more than 90 countries, working through humanitarian relief, long-term development programs and advocacy to end global poverty.

At Oxfam, we firmly believe that ending poverty and reducing inequality begins with gender justice and women's rights. Oxfam works with indigenous people's organizations in many parts of the world to support their struggles, to defend their rights and to protect their lands, territories and resources.

In 2015, Oxfam surveyed 40 leading oil, gas and mining companies to assess their commitments around indigenous engagement and community consent. Our community consent index revealed that extractive sector companies are increasingly adopting policies with commitments to seek and obtain community consent prior to developing major projects. It has become a recognized and accepted industry norm. It's good development and good business all at the same time.

Further research, however, has identified major gaps in the ways these commitments are being implemented. In several countries our indigenous partners have found that women face systemic barriers in participating fully and equally in decision-making by governments or companies around major resource development projects.

We have two recommendations for the committee to consider today.

First, indigenous engagement processes, whether by the Crown or by private sector actors in the energy sector, should become more gender-responsive and conducted in accordance with international human rights standards, including the UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples.

committee hansard rnnr 32715 words - read the full entry at permanent link - comments: 0. Posted at 22:44 on February 19, 2019

2019-02-19 PROC 142

Standing Committee on Procedure and House Affairs

(1100)

[English]

The Chair (Hon. Larry Bagnell (Yukon, Lib.)):

Good morning, everyone. Welcome back after constituency week. Welcome to the 142nd meeting of the Standing Committee on Procedure and House Affairs. This meeting is being televised.

Our first order of business today is the consideration of the votes of the interim estimates 2019-20 for the House of Commons and the Parliamentary Protective Service.

We are pleased to be joined by the Honourable Geoff Regan, Speaker of the House of Commons. Accompanying the Speaker from the House of Commons are Charles Robert, Clerk of the House; Michel Patrice, deputy clerk, administration; and Daniel Paquette, chief financial officer.

Also, from the Parliamentary Protective Service, we welcome Superintendent Marie-Claude Côté, interim director; and Robert Graham, administration and personnel officer.

Thank you all for being here. I will now turn the floor over to you, Mr. Speaker, for your opening statement.

Hon. Geoff Regan (Speaker of the House of Commons):

Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman and committee members. Thank you for welcoming us here today. [Translation]

I am pleased to be here to present the 2019-20 interim estimates and to address the funding required to maintain and enhance the House Administration's support to members of Parliament and the institution.

I am joined today by members of the House Administration's executive management team, who you know well: Charles Robert, clerk of the House of Commons; Michel Patrice, deputy clerk, Administration; and Daniel Paquette, chief financial officer.

I will also be presenting the interim estimates for the Parliamentary Protective Service. Therefore, I am also accompanied by Marie-Claude Côté, acting director of PPS, and Robert Graham, the service's Administration and Personnel Officer.[English]

The interim estimates for 2019-20 include an overview of spending requirements for the first three months of the fiscal year, with a comparison to the 2018-19 estimates, as well as the proposed schedules for the first appropriation bill.

The interim estimates of the House of Commons, as tabled in the House, total approximately $87.5 million and represent three-twelfths of the total voted authorities that will be included in the upcoming 2019-20 main estimates. Once the main estimates are tabled in the House, I anticipate that we will meet again in the spring, at which time I will provide an overview of the year-over-year changes.

Today, I'll give you a brief overview of the House of Commons' main priorities.

Ensuring that members and House officers have the services and resources to meet their needs is essential in supporting them in the fulfillment of their parliamentary functions.

By the way, Mr. Chairman, I will of course try to speak at a rate where it's possible for the interpreters to interpret, because we all appreciate the wonderful work they do, and I don't wish to make it more difficult.

(1105)

[Translation]

The House Administration's top priority is to support members in their work as parliamentarians by focusing on service-delivery excellence and ongoing modernization. As an example, this past year, we have seen the opening of four multidisciplinary Source plus service centres, which are ready to provide members and their staff with in-person support.

A team of House of Commons employees is available to provide assistance related to finance, human resources, information technology and various operational services offered by the House Administration. If members ever have any comments about this, I would be very interested in hearing them.

Another service-delivery initiative has been the implementation of a standardized approach for computer and printing equipment in constituency offices across the country. This initiative was launched as a pilot project this year. Its purpose is threefold: to ensure parity between Hill and constituency computing services; to enhance IT support and security; and to simplify purchasing and life-cycling of equipment in the constituency offices.

In addition, all constituency offices will now be provided with a complete set of standard computer devices and applications following the next general election.[English]

The House administration aims to provide innovative, effective, accountable and non-partisan support to members. To do so, it must attract and retain an engaged, qualified and productive workforce that acts responsibly and with integrity.

Cost-of-living increases are essential to recruitment efforts for members, House officers and the House administration as employers, and funding for these increases is accounted for in the estimates.

Members will know that employee support programs are also a priority. These programs, which are offered to employees of members, House officers, research offices and the administration, include an employee and family assistance program and other resources and events, such as those taking place this February for Wellness Month.

The renewal of our physical spaces and the services provided within them is another priority for the House administration.

The opening of West Block and the visitor welcome centre is the most significant change to date to the parliamentary precinct. We believe that West Block is a model to other parliaments tackling similar challenges with respect to aging facilities. In fact, I know many of you are aware that, at Westminster, they're planning to move out and have a major renovation to the Palace of Westminster, which of course is an immense undertaking. That will be a few years away still.

The House of Commons works closely with its parliamentary partners and with Public Services and Procurement Canada in support of the long-term vision and plan.

For the coming years, the focus will be on decommissioning and restoring Centre Block. We will also continue to review and update the House of Commons' requirements and guiding principles for future renovations to the parliamentary precinct. The administration of the House of Commons will continue to look at ways to best engage members in the Centre Block project moving forward and to ensure they continue to be part of discussions on the design and operational requirements for that building.

An ongoing priority is the operation, support, maintenance and life-cycle management of equipment and connectivity elements in all buildings. This work is essential to providing a mobile work environment for members and the administration, which is something that we all, of course, now expect.[Translation]

I now turn to the interim estimates for the Parliamentary Protective Service. The Parliamentary Protective Service is requesting access to $28 million in these interim estimates.

The funding requirements align with the four key strategic priorities of the service: protective operational excellence; engaged and healthy employees; balanced security and access; and sound stewardship.

The majority of the PPS annual budget is attributed to its first priority, protective operational excellence, which includes personnel salaries and overtime costs.

In keeping with the service's aim to allocate existing resources as judiciously as possible, several posts were added to the overall security posture in response to the opening of the interim accommodations. I would suggest that, if members have any questions with respect to the security posture, the committee may wish to go in camera for that exchange.

(1110)

[English]

The service recently reclassified the positions of all protection officers, which led to an increase in their salaries retroactive to April 1, 2018.

PPS has also successfully reached a bargaining agreement with the Senate Protective Service Employees Association and an extension of the previous agreement with the Public Service Alliance of Canada. For this reason, funding has been earmarked to make payments for retroactive economic increases as a result of these negotiations.

As PPS evolves, the service is gradually reducing the presence of the Royal Canadian Mounted Police in certain areas on Parliament Hill and within the parliamentary precinct and, in turn, increasing the resources and presence of PPS officers.

The remainder of the PPS budget ensures that the administration, which supports the operations of the service, is adequately equipped and resourced. This means ensuring that security assets and technology are properly managed and that employees are continuously supported in their health and well-being. As PPS approaches its fourth anniversary this June, its administration is becoming more agile and responsive to the needs of Parliament and of its own workforce.[Translation]

Mr. Chair, this concludes my overview of the 2019-20 interim estimates for the House of Commons and Parliamentary Protective Service.

My officials and I would be pleased to answer any questions from members.

The Chair:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Graham, you may go ahead. [English]

Mr. David de Burgh Graham (Laurentides—Labelle, Lib.):

Mr. Speaker, every time you come here, you apologize for the speed at which you speak, and I keep looking around and feeling all these eyes looking at me.[Translation]

Ms. Côté, you are the fourth interim director of the PPS since it was established. There have been many conflicts with the unions, all of which were based on an application to the Labour Relations and Employment Board, a response to which is still outstanding.

Do you have a new vision that could bring peace to the PPS?

Superintendent Marie-Claude Côté (Interim Director, Parliamentary Protective Service):

committee hansard proc 31831 words - read the full entry at permanent link - comments: 0. Posted at 22:44 on February 19, 2019

2019-02-19 FAAE 127

Standing Committee on Foreign Affairs and International Development

(0845)

[English]

The Chair (Mr. Michael Levitt (York Centre, Lib.)):

Good morning, everyone. I call to order the 127th meeting of the House of Commons Standing Committee on Foreign Affairs and International Development.

This morning we will be continuing our study on Canada's support for international democratic development. We will be hearing from four individuals this morning. Our first two speakers are on the line.

First, from London, England, from the Westminster Foundation for Democracy, we have Anthony Smith, the chief executive officer.

Good morning, sir, or good afternoon.

Mr. Anthony Smith (Chief Executive Officer, Westminster Foundation for Democracy):

Thank you very much.

The Chair:

From Washington, D.C., from the National Endowment for Democracy, we have Carl Gershman, the president.

Gentlemen, I would ask you to deliver your introductions, each taking maybe slightly less than 10 minutes. I know that everybody will have lots of questions for you. We'll finish off the hour with those.

Mr. Smith, perhaps I could have you begin.

Mr. Anthony Smith:

Thank you very much, Chair. I'll try to be quicker than that.

I'm very grateful for your invitation to give evidence to this inquiry. Having read the remarks of some of your previous witnesses, I won't repeat some of the general points they made about the recent trends in democratic governance and what they said about the importance of supporting democracy around the world. I fully endorse what they said and I also strongly endorse the points they made about the importance of Canadian support for democratic governance.

I think the most useful contribution I can make to your committee is probably to describe the origins and governance of my organization, its current work and some of the factors that have affected our approach in recent years.

The Westminster Foundation for Democracy was established in 1992 at the initiative of a cross-party group of parliamentarians who wanted to support their counterparts in eastern Europe and in other regions that were enjoying new freedoms following the end of the Cold War. Since our Parliament did not have the means to fund such work, they approached the British government which, having looked at the practices in the U.S. and Germany in particular, decided to establish our foundation. Since then, our governance structure and mission have remained broadly the same.

We are an arm's-length body of the Foreign and Commonwealth Office, so the board and the CEO are appointed by the foreign secretary. The board is non-executive and has six political members. At present, they are all members of Parliament—they don't have to be. It has four non-political members as well.

The Foreign and Commonwealth Office approves our strategy, but we have operational independence in our work. Although we are not a parliamentary body, the Speaker of the House of Commons is our patron, and we work very closely with all the U.K.'s Parliaments, including the devolved Parliament and assemblies. The U.K. political parties are obviously critically important to us. Our mission remains the same now as it was in 1992: to support improvements in democratic governance in developing and transition countries.

Today we have offices in 30 countries and we work with four main stakeholders: Parliament, political parties, electoral bodies and civil society. Our focus is the quality of the political system in our partner countries, so our main areas of thematic focus are women's political participation, inclusion of marginalized groups, accountability and transparency.

Our dominant methodology is peer-to-peer support, sharing experiences among counterparts. The details of each program are different and tailored to the requirements of our individual partners. I can provide examples later on. There are also many in our annual report and on our website. We also have a small research program and a research partnership with the University of Birmingham in England.

On our funding, we receive an annual grant from the Foreign and Commonwealth Office. This has been steady at £3.5 million in recent years. We also receive grants from the U.K. government, and from a range of other donors for programs in specific countries or regions for which we usually compete with other organizations. Our overall revenue this year will be about £17 million.

Let me just mention three factors that have affected our recent approach to the work in this area. The first factor is interests versus values. We are very much a values-driven organization, but we can no long rely on values alone to persuade donors to invest in democracy support. We also point out that democracy is a critical contributor to all the U.K.'s international priorities from security through to prosperity, from poverty reduction through to carbon reduction. My guess is that it's the same for Canada and all our other allies in their international priorities.

We also want to be clearer than in the past about the specific elements of democratic practice that count, be it financial oversight, policy-driven political parties or gender-sensitive parliaments. It's no good anymore just to say that we support the general idea of democracy. We have to be much more specific than that.

(0850)

The second factor that affects our work is that change takes time. We believe that progress comes through patient investment in a combination of institutions and leadership. Institutions need skills and a political culture that's adaptive, tolerant and resilient in the face of the inevitable challenges that every country will face, but every country also needs leadership to respond to those challenges and to take up opportunities when they arise.

In some ways, time in this work is more valuable than money. Democracy needs modest resources but abundant patience. I would add that for us as an organization, the position that we're in today, which is feeling pretty strong at home, has taken 25 years of work to get to. So we've needed patience domestically as well.

These two factors feed into the final one that I want to mention, namely, how to work as effectively as possible to support democracy. My feeling in the U.K., and my observation in other countries, is that effectiveness has to start with a clear policy. Each country, be it the U.K., the U.S., Canada or whichever it might be, needs a well-developed democracy support policy that will secure broad political consensus. We haven't all had that all of the time, but I think it is a very important element.

With a strong policy, we can establish a coherent approach across government and help to maintain support over a long period. Without a strong policy, there is a risk of incoherence and a short-term approach.

Mr. Chair, I'm happy to elaborate on any of those points, but those are the main things that I wanted to say to start off the discussion.

Thank you.

The Chair:

Thank you very much.

We are now going to Carl Gershman.

Sir, please begin your remarks.

Mr. Carl Gershman (President, National Endowment for Democracy):

Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and thank you to the committee for inviting me to testify this morning.

I applaud the fact that you're initiating a study of Canada's role in democratic development around the world. I've long believed that Canada has a critically important role to play in this field, never more so than at the present time.

NED was founded 35 years ago, at a hopeful moment, when what was subsequently called the third wave of democratization was just beginning to gather momentum. As, of course, we well know, the current period is very, very different. The year 2018 marked the 13th consecutive year, according to Freedom House, in which democracy has declined around the world. This period has seen the rising power and assertiveness of authoritarian states like China, Russia and Iran; the backsliding of once democratic countries like Turkey, Venezuela, the Philippines, Thailand and Hungary; and the rise of populist and nationalist movements and parties in the established democracies. Autocratic regimes have tried to repress independent groups working to promote greater freedom and to cut them off from international assistance, from institutions like the National Democratic Institute and the International Republican Institute, NED's party institutes. They've also passed harsh laws that make it illegal for NGOs to receive foreign assistance.

The work nonetheless goes on and has even been expanding, which is a testament to the determination and the courage of indigenous groups that want to continue to work and receive needed assistance despite the risks. We should not forget that despite all the backsliding, there have also been important gains over the past year in Ethiopia, Armenia and Malaysia. NED provided support to democrats in all of these countries before the political openings, which positioned us to quickly scale up our support once the openings occurred. This is an example of our commitment and ability to navigate around the obstacles created by authoritarian regimes and to continue to provide assistance, while taking care to protect the safety of our grantees.

NED is an unusual institution. It was built to take on tough challenges. Following President Reagan's historic Westminster address in 1982, which called for a new effort to support democracy throughout the world, NED was created as a non-governmental organization governed by a private and independent board of directors. NED receives its core funding in the form of an annual congressional appropriation that was authorized in the National Endowment for Democracy Act passed in 1983. The NED Act also built a firewall between the endowment and the executive branch of our government.

NED is a private, bipartisan, grant-making institution that steers clear of immediate policy disputes and takes a long-term approach to democratic development. In addition to supporting grassroots democratic initiatives, it also serves as a hub of activity, resources and intellectual exchange for democracy activists, practitioners and analysts around the world.

NED takes a multisectoral approach to democratic assistance, funding programs by its four core institutes, which represent our two major political parties, the business community and the labour movement. I'm aware that you heard from the presidents of our two party institutes, NDI and IRI, just two weeks ago. Each of the NED's four core institutes is able to access its sector's expertise and experience from all over the world. In addition, its targeted demand-driven small grants program responds directly to the needs of local NGOs, defends human rights, strengthens independent media and civic education, and empowers women and youth in a manner that enables them to establish credibility as independent democratizing forces in their own societies.

As an autonomous institution dedicated to supporting democracy, NED can steadily strengthen indigenous civil society organizations, learn through trial and error, and build important networks of trust and collaboration that can be effective over the long term.

As a nimble private organization with no field offices abroad, NED has developed a reputation for acting swiftly, flexibly and effectively in providing vital assistance to activists working in the most challenging environments. It also devotes enormous efforts to monitoring the work of our grantees and to fulfilling our fiduciary responsibilities in the careful management of taxpayer funds.

(0855)

NED further leverages its grants program through networking and recognition activities that provide political support and solidarity to front-line activists. These activities include the World Movement for Democracy, which networks democracy activists globally; the Center for International Media Assistance; the Reagan-Fascell democracy fellows program; and our own democracy award events on Capitol Hill.

NED also promotes scholarly research through the International Forum for Democratic Studies and the Journal of Democracy, giving activists access to the latest insights on aiding democratic transitions and strengthening liberal values, and also helping to inform thinking internationally on critical new challenges facing democracy.

In 2015, the Congress provided NED with additional funds to develop a strategic plan to respond to resurgent authoritarianism. As part of this plan, NED now funds programs that address six strategic priorities: helping civil society respond to repression; defending the integrity of the information space; countering extremism and promoting pluralism and tolerance; reversing the failure of governance in many transitional countries; countering the kleptocracy that is a pillar of modern authoritarianism; and strengthening co-operation among democracies in meeting the threat to democracy.

By pursuing common strategic objectives, the entire net effort has become stronger and more integrated, with greater co-operation taking place across the different regions and among the five institutions—NED and its four core institutes—that comprise what we call the NED family.

committee faae hansard 33421 words - read the full entry at permanent link - comments: 0. Posted at 22:44 on February 19, 2019

2019-02-07 RNNR 127

Standing Committee on Natural Resources

(1530)

[English]

The Chair (Mr. James Maloney (Etobicoke—Lakeshore, Lib.)):

Good afternoon, everybody. Thank you for joining us this afternoon.

We have two witnesses in our first hour. We're doing a study on international best practices and we have our first two international witnesses. Professor Turi is here with us today and Professor Hernes is joining us from Norway.

What's the time difference, Professor? It's quite late there, I believe, isn't it?

Professor Hans-Kristian Hernes (Professor, UiT The Arctic University of Norway, As an Individual):

I'm six hours ahead of you, so it's 9:30.

The Chair:

We're very grateful to you for taking the time, especially at that time of day.

The process for the meeting is that each of you will be given an opportunity to deliver opening remarks for up to 10 minutes and then, when both of you have concluded, we will open the floor to questions from around the table.

Professor Turi, since you're with us today, why don't we start with you?

Dr. Ellen Inga Turi (Associate Professor, Sámi University of Applied Sciences, As an Individual):

Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.

Let me first say that it's an honour for me to appear before the committee this afternoon. I work as a researcher on indigenous knowledge and environmental governance in the Nordics. I'm also indigenous Sami and I grew up in a reindeer-herding family in northern Norway.

I'm looking at your mandate and I've been thinking a little bit about what it is that I can contribute to your work. I'm not sure whether it will be best practices that I'm able to present this afternoon, but rather I believe my presentation will focus on challenges including indigenous knowledge and environmental governance and planning in the Nordics.

My testimony this afternoon represents research and engagement conducted by my fellow scientists and myself, in partnership with both reindeer herders and indigenous leaders over the past decade. I particularly want to acknowledge the Sámi University of Applied Sciences, the International Centre for Reindeer Husbandry and the Association of World Reindeer Herders as leading institutions in this work.

I will focus mainly on experiences from the Nordics and highlight challenges that we have identified for engaging indigenous peoples and indigenous knowledge in governance processes and then focusing on reindeer herding, in particular.

I'll give a very brief introduction to reindeer herding for those of you who are maybe not familiar with it. It's the primary livelihood for over 20 indigenous peoples throughout the circumpolar North. It involves more than 100,000 people and around 2.5 million semi-domesticated reindeer in nine nation states. Most of this is focused in Eurasia, but you do also have a small reindeer herd in Canada.

Reindeer herding is a nomadic livelihood, which is characterized by extensive, yet low-impact, use of land. In Norway, where I focus my research, we have some 250,000 reindeer on approximately 150,000 square kilometres, which is equivalent to 40% of all the land area of Norway, yet only about 3,000 people are involved.

Reindeer herding is a very land extensive livelihood, but doesn't involve a lot of people and is not a huge economy. It can be seen as a human-coupled ecosystem that has a high resilience to climate variability and change and it is an indigenous model for sustainable management of marginal areas in the Arctic. A key source of resilience for reindeer herding is indigenous knowledge that has been accumulated over generations.

In this context, what I mean by indigenous knowledge—and this is a definition that I'm borrowing from the work of the permanent participants at the Arctic Council—is: ...a systematic way of thinking and knowing that is elaborated and applied to phenomena across biological, physical, cultural and linguistic systems. [Indigenous] knowledge is owned by the holders of that knowledge, often collectively, and is uniquely expressed and transmitted through Indigenous languages. It is a body of knowledge generated through cultural practices, lived experiences including extensive and multi-generational observations, lessons and skills. It has been developed and verified over millennia and is still developing in a living process, including knowledge acquired today and in the future, and it is passed on from generation to generation.

Within reindeer herding, significant knowledge has been generated over time about both reindeer and the human relationships to them and relationships between animals and the environment. There's also accumulated knowledge of dramatic changes in the natural environment and about strategies of how to adapt to such challenges.

This kind of knowledge still forms the main basis for survival for reindeer-herding peoples. It has not been replaced or suspended by research-based knowledge. It's very much available and it's in use every day, but such knowledge has historically been neglected by research and policy. Based on our research, we argue that perhaps more than ever, indigenous knowledge is now crucial for the future survival of reindeer herding in the face of major change.

(1535)

As you all know, Arctic areas are undergoing a number of changes, ranging from social to environmental, and these are capable of adversely affecting traditional livelihoods. The extensive and nature-based character of reindeer herding means that it is directly impacted by the so-called “megatrends”, and by that I mean trends such as climate change, loss of biodiversity and land-use change. The impacts of these megatrends are inseparable.

Allow me to elaborate.

Future climate scenarios indicate that mean winter temperatures may increase by as much as 7°C to 8 °C over the next 100 years in Sami reindeer-herding pasturelands, and that the snow season may be one to three months shorter. This represents a significant shift, and it is likely that rapid and variable fluctuations between freezing and thawing will increase. Why is this important? Reindeer herding is a livelihood that depends on snow conditions for reindeer to be able to get through to the forage underneath. Warm temperatures and melting snow have periodically created bad grazing years in Sami reindeer herding. Extremely bad grazing conditions, which we in the Sami language call "goavvi", cause starvation and loss of reindeer and subsequently negatively impact reindeer herders' community and organization.

In the last 100 years, goavvi has occurred around 12 times in Guovdageaidnu, but we are seeing in climate projections that the frequency of this type of weather condition will likely increase in the future.

Yet, if you talk to Sami reindeer herders, they will often say they are much more alarmed by loss of grazing land than they are of climate change. Why? A reason for this is that mobility, moving your herd to a different area, is a key adaptive strategy for adverse snow conditions. Access to pasture resources will therefore be even more important under climate change. This has been recognized by the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change Fifth Assessment Report, which points out that protection of grazing land will be the most important adaptive strategy for reindeer herders under climate change.

Loss of pastures is a significant challenge for reindeer husbandry in all places where it's practised, but this has been particularly pronounced in the Nordic countries. Pastures are lost due to all sorts of developments: roads, infrastructure, military activities, power lines, pipelines, dams, leisure homes and related activities that all have contributed to decline in reindeer pastures.

Loss of pastures occurs principally in two ways: first, the physical destruction of pastures; and second, the effective though non-destructive removal of habitat or reduction of its value as a resource. By that I mean the gradual abandonment by reindeer of previously high-use areas due to avoidance of areas that are disturbed by human activities. The numbers are alarming. Studies show that approximately 25% of grazing land in northern Norway is now strongly disturbed, including 35% of key coastal areas. This figure has been estimated to increase to as much as 78% by 2050 if no changes are made in national or regional policies. That means that up to 1% of summer grazing grounds used by Sami reindeer herders along the coast of Norway are lost every year.

(1540)

A major challenge for reindeer herding is that the majority of the loss of grazing land occurs through piecemeal loss. For example, in spite of Norway having ratified ILO convention 169 on the rights of indigenous people and the UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, Sami reindeer herders have so far had very little influence on land rights and piecemeal development. Despite the fact that reindeer-herding groups and individuals are heard in decision-making processes—for example, through participatory processes—reindeer herders' indigenous knowledge is not included as part of the decision-making foundation.

Our research shows that the challenge of making use of indigenous knowledge in governance relates to more than just a conflict of what is known—i.e. an epistemological conflict—but also to a conflict in the logic of what constitutes appropriate functional and geographical scales of governance and, not least, what constitutes appropriate land use. Sectorial fragmentation in governmental administration leads to a situation in which assessments of the cumulative effects of all projects combined are not part of decision-making. In other words, one ministry is in charge of infrastructure, another is in charge of hydro power development, a third forestry, etc., while reindeer herding, on the other hand, due to its extensive nature and dependence on different types of pastures, constantly monitors and records any changes in land uses.

I argue that failure to integrate these perspectives into governance systems can be seen as a lost opportunity to account for cumulative long-term effects of land use changes in decision-making.

Our research suggests that the process of making use of indigenous knowledge in governance needs to start already at the policy formation stage; that is, when indigenous knowledge is not part of the policy formation process. Waiting until policy implementation to include it will be more challenging, if not downright impossible—

(1545)

The Chair:

Professor, I'm going to have to ask you to wrap up very quickly, if you can.

Dr. Ellen Inga Turi:

Yes.

I will end my testimony by giving you a very practical example in the words of reindeer herder Aslak Ante Sara, who has his reindeer in Hammerfest, the northern Norwegian city where Statoil has its LNG plant. He explains his experience with the planning process in Snøhvit as follows: We were sort of forgotten in the whole process and our perspectives were not focused on. Because the LNG-plant itself was not placed directly on reindeer pastures, we were not fully included in the total process of regulation. And with this start that we got, [when] we were not focussed on, we were continuously lagging behind in the process, not able to follow this up properly.... Due to the development we have seen an unexpected explosion in human activities. We have much more competition for our pastures now.... When you have this kind of major industrial development in Hammerfest, it makes the area around Hammerfest very attractive for other types of development. Also the society of Hammerfest is rapidly expanding because of the development. Now there is talk about several possible projects, and planning has begun. This includes petroleum development, new power lines, windmills, infrastructure development and roads. These are heavy investments driven by independent and influential economic sources, also in part independent of Statoil. We also see increasing human activities in our pasture areas in terms of outdoor leisure activities.

Thank you very much.

The Chair:

Thank you.

Professor Hernes.

Prof. Hans-Kristian Hernes:

Thank you very much for the invitation to take part in this meeting. I'm very honoured by it.

What I'm going to talk about is based on research projects here at UiT, The Arctic University of Norway. They are carried out through the co-operation of researchers in Norway, Sweden, Canada and Australia.

I must also say that I've thought a little bit about what Canada can learn from Norway. That was my first silly thought. But I've also been teaching in a joint master's program with a Canadian university and in my own, and I can see that we can learn from very different examples. What I'm going to talk about then is the situation in Norway. I have Norwegian examples, and maybe we can discuss how they can be used in the Canadian context.

committee hansard rnnr 30496 words - read the full entry at permanent link - comments: 0. Posted at 22:44 on February 07, 2019

2019-02-07 TRAN 129

Standing Committee on Transport, Infrastructure and Communities

(1100)

[English]

The Chair (Hon. Judy A. Sgro (Humber River—Black Creek, Lib.)):

I am calling the meeting to order. This is the Standing Committee on Transport, Infrastructure and Communities, 42nd Parliament. Pursuant to the order of reference from Wednesday, November 28, 2018, we are continuing our study of challenges facing flight schools in Canada.

I welcome all of you here today. This is our new meeting room in West Block and it's our first meeting here. We are joined today by, over and above the committee members, the mover of the motion, Mr. Fuhr. Welcome.

Today we have as witnesses, from Aéro Loisirs, Caroline Farly, Chief Pilot and Chief Instructor; from Air Canada Pilots Association, Captain Mike Hoff, External Affairs Committee; and from Carson Air, Marc Vanderaegen, Flight School Director, Southern Interior Flight Centre.

Mr. Vanderaegen, would you like to begin for five minutes?

Mr. Marc Vanderaegen (Flight School Director, Southern Interior Flight Centre, Carson Air):

Madam Chair, good morning and thank you for the invitation to participate today. I'm going to be reading from notes because I want to make sure I don't miss anything.

Southern Interior Flight Centre is a part of the Carson group of companies, which provides flight training in Kelowna, B.C., and medevac, freight and fuel and hangarage services in Kelowna, Calgary, Vancouver and Abbotsford. We get to face the challenges related to the pilot shortage in all aspects, not just training, but that's the focus for today.

At the flight school level, we train students to become recreational, general commercial, airline and instructor pilots, and we have a commercial aviation diploma program with Okanagan College. We have formal training partnerships with WestJet Encore, Jazz, Porter, and Carson Air, as well as informal connections with many companies seeking our graduates. As to the challenges, some of these you will recognize from previous meetings.

First, there is inadequate financial assistance for students. The high cost of initial training for a commercial pilot's licence combined with low funding leaves students deeply in debt. Available student loan assistance combined through Canada student loans and B.C. student loans, for example, in our province is a mere $5,440 per semester. Put this against the demonstrated need for $23,519 per semester and this means the typical unmet need in this is $18,000 for each semester, or over $90,000 one might need for a five-semester diploma program.

Second, we are facing increasing training costs. To acquire instructor staff, we now have to train flight instructors at a burden of $10,000 per instructor. This used to be a revenue stream generated from commercial pilots who wanted to instruct and has, instead, become a cost that now has to be passed along to the general flight training student group, thereby increasing their financial burden. The costs of aircraft parts and fuel are also unstable and increasing significantly. For example, a single-engine Cessna 172 aircraft new from the factory is currently $411,000 U.S. and requires a lead time of 14 months for delivery. Used aircraft result in bidding wars and still run 50% to 75% of new cost before adding in the high cost of overhauling major components like engines and propellers.

Not only is the domestic training demand fuelling aircraft sales and prices but international companies have been purchasing aircraft in groups of 25 or more for their own training use overseas. In addition to costs being increased through those means, the pool of aircraft maintenance engineers is also being depleted, thereby requiring higher pay and incentives to attract and retain qualified maintenance personnel.

Our third challenge is our general lack of access to potential staff. With the current state of hiring in the industry, new pilots do not need to spend time instructing to build experience to move to being commercial operators. Many graduates are going straight to airlines or other companies directly out of flight school. The lower availability of instructors equals fewer instructors who advance through the instructor class system in order to become supervising instructors or to be able to train new instructors.

As a temporary solution, hiring qualified international applicants for instructor positions is not a viable option for us as the current LMIA process is overly onerous and the lengthy Transport Canada licence conversion process also holds up the administrative processing of international applicants. Medical requirements are also overly restrictive in some circumstances, for example, when dealing with correctable colour blindness or when preventing retired airline pilots who no longer hold medicals from teaching in a simulator for us as they were already able to do at the airlines.

To counter that, our recommendations fall into two groups.

First, we need more aviation-specific funding. I think that's pretty clear. We need to increase federal funding in the way of additional student loans and loan forgiveness programs for students. We need to look at federal funding support in the way of instructor training or retention grants to help alleviate the financial burden passed along to the students. We also need to look at federal funding or tax credits for capital purchases to also help cover the extremely high and increasingly higher equipment costs.

The second group of recommendations involves being able to increase access to instructor staff. First, an increase in student funding would allow flight training units to pay instructors and aircraft maintenance engineers higher wages to be able to retain them. Next, providing easier access in the short term for international employees through the LMIA programs, either on a fast track or by exempting suitable candidates entirely, would allow us to hire pilots or aircraft maintenance engineers who are available internationally to fill the gap.

Reducing turnaround times at Transport Canada for the licence-conversion—

(1105)

The Chair:

Excuse me, Mr. Vanderaegen, could you do your closing comments, please.

Mr. Marc Vanderaegen:

Sure. In closing, I'll get straight to the point. We need these challenges to be addressed to ensure that we cannot only stay in business today but to expand to meet the growing need that's coming up through the market.

The Chair:

Thank you very much.

Captain Hoff, you have five minutes, please.

Captain Mike Hoff (Captain, External Affairs Committee, Air Canada Pilots Association):

Good morning, and thank you.

My name is Michael Hoff. I am an airline pilot, and I love my job. I'm a Boeing 787 captain at Air Canada based in Vancouver. I'm here representing the Air Canada Pilots Association.

Before I begin my remarks, I'd like to thank all of you for taking on this issue. Stable and predictable access to aviation is important in a country as large as ours. Many sectors are struggling with labour supply issues. For pilots, the issue is complex. In our submission to the committee, you will see that the cost of pilot training and limited access to training flight time are factors, and not only that, so are the poor safety records and working conditions for entry-level pilots, factors that are borne out in research we have done to show that young Canadians are more likely to be interested in a career as a nurse, a firefighter or even a video gamer than as a pilot.

The easiest way for me to explain this is to tell my story through personal experience. Not only am I a pilot, but my 26-year-old son now flies for the regional airline Jazz. Let me explain. Pilot training can run upwards of $90,000, a tremendous cost burden for families, and a difficult case to make if you need to secure a loan. For my son to get the training and accumulate the hours he needed, I ended up buying a small airplane, a PA-22, and we hired our own instructor. Yes, if you're wondering, it is somewhat like learning to drive a car: It can be better if someone else tells your kid what to do.

Flight schools across Canada are fragmented. Some are aligned with accredited colleges; others are not. Many are small, family-run operations. The Canada Revenue Agency does not recognize tuition expenses for all of them. Personally, I can tell you it took three years of fighting before CRA recognized my son's flight school for tax purposes. Not only that, I wasn't able to deduct any of the flying time in my own aircraft. Now contrast this with how easy it was to claim my other son's university tuition.

A lot of students think that when they get their pilot's licence, they can walk into a job at WestJet or Air Canada. In reality, it's more like pro sports. Before you make it to the big leagues, you have to literally get thousands of hours on the farm team. In Canada, that often means flying up north.

Let me speak frankly. Day-to-day regulatory oversight can be totally disconnected from the reality on the ground. Rules require self-monitoring, and that means pilots are supposed to decide for themselves whether or not they are fit for duty, which can be a tough decision when you are new and out of your element. In some operations, if a pilot reports that they are unfit to fly due to fatigue, they will be asked if they need a blankie and a pacifier to facilitate their nap. That is the culture.

If you need the job to get a better job, it can create a tremendous amount of pressure on inexperienced pilots, and it's one of the reasons that, when we look at accident rates in Canadian aviation, the majority of hull losses—in other words, the total loss of an aircraft, and far too often the souls on board—are in the far north. I can tell you honestly that, as a parent, I did not get a good night's sleep when my son was flying up north.

What can we do about this? The survey we commissioned showed very clearly that parents and students today are more attracted to the stable, safe pathways and immediate benefits that more traditional careers might offer. We need to reduce and eliminate the barriers that students face.

That means, one, we need policies to help defray the costs of entry, including making loans and tax credits available for flight schools. Two, we need to find ways to make accumulating flight and simulator time easier. Three, we need to encourage accredited public institutions to build flight schools. Four, we need to work on making aviation safer, which includes ensuring strong regulatory oversight where our new pilots are flying, especially in the north. Statistics show that we must do better. This protects not only our newest pilots but also their passengers.

I am proud to be a pilot. Nothing makes me happier than encouraging young people to consider this as a career. We have the best view in the world from our office, but there's work to be done.

I am grateful for the attention from this committee on these important issues.

(1110)

I would specifically like to thank Mr. Fuhr for bringing this forward.

The Chair:

Thank you very much, Captain Hoff.

Ms. Farly, go ahead, please.

Ms. Caroline Farly (Chief Pilot and Chief Instructor, Aéro Loisirs):

Thank you. I will also read, and I'm going to do this presentation in French.[Translation]

Good morning. Thank you for having me today.

I am Caroline Farly, owner of the Aéro Loisirs flying school. I am Chief Pilot and Chief Instructor, as well as the person in charge of aircraft maintenance and authorized agent for Transport Canada. I became an instructor in 2011 in order to pursue it as a career.

I want to thank Louise Gagnon, who was a pilot and class 1 instructor at Cargair for 25 years, and Rémi Cusach, founder of the ALM flying school, also class 1 instructor for 25 years and now retired. Both are currently delegated examiners at Transport Canada and helped me prepare this presentation.

Lengthy student admission delays are a problem for flying schools. Behind the problem is an instructor shortage, which is not improving. It is urgent to address our inability to meet the current and growing demand of commercial pilot licence candidates.

committee hansard tran 36210 words - read the full entry at permanent link - comments: 0. Posted at 22:44 on February 07, 2019

2019-02-06 14:10 House intervention / intervention en chambre

Events, Statements by Members, Winter

Déclarations de députés, Évènements, Hiver

Mr. Speaker,

Now that January has finally passed
This bitter cold just cannot last
As temperatures begin to climb
February brings winter carnival time
Head to Sainte-Marguerite-du-Lac-Masson to skate
Or to Brébeuf for a dancing date
Sainte-Adèle and Huberdeau fill with sledding squeals
While at Ferme-Neuve they race snowmobiles
In Val-Morin and Notre-Dame-du-Laus, the fishing divine
While Mont-Tremblant is the place to dine
Sainte-Agathe-des-Monts can toot its own horn
Cause that's where Bonhomme Carnaval was born
Winter is about more than clearing snow
So Laurentides—Labelle is the place to go
That is why I give three cheers
To community members and volunteers
All of them are truly key
To enjoying this great party.

Monsieur le Président,

Alors que janvier est terminé
et les grands froids presque tous passés;
Février est le mois idéal
pour célébrer l'hiver au carnaval!
En patinant sur le lac à Sainte-Marguerite-du-Lac-Masson;
en dansant à Brébeuf au rythme des rigodons;
En s'amusant à glisser à Sainte-Adèle ou Huberdeau;
en pratiquant la pêche blanche à Val-Morin ou Notre-Dame-du-Laus;
À Ferme-Neuve au Grand-Prix sur glace;
ou à Mont-Tremblant sur l'une des nombreuses terrasses;
D'un bout à l'autre de Laurentides—Labelle,
pour nous l'hiver c'est bien plus qu'user de la pelle.
Ça fait d'ailleurs longtemps que c'est une tradition:
Bonhomme Carnaval est né chez nous, à Sainte-Agathe-des-Monts.
Je lève mon chapeau aux bénévoles et membres de la communauté,
à qui l'on doit l'organisation de toutes ces activités;
Et à toutes celles et ceux qui en profitent à fond;
vivant pleinement l'hiver dans ma circonscription!

Watch | Hansard

Ecoutez | Hansard

hansard parlchmbr statements tv 263 words - read the full entry at permanent link - comments: 0. Posted at 21:02 on February 06, 2019

2019-02-05 RNNR 126

Standing Committee on Natural Resources

(1620)

[English]

The Chair (Mr. James Maloney (Etobicoke—Lakeshore, Lib.)):

Good afternoon, everybody. Welcome.

We are running a little bit late. I understand that there are some delays at security. We apologize to our witnesses, but we're grateful for your patience. We have one witness who, I understand, is still in line downstairs, but rather than wait for him, we will get going.

Before I get to the witnesses, I just want to formally welcome our newest committee member, Mr. Graham.

Thank you for joining us.

We have here three of our four witness groups. We have Mr. Brian Craik, Ms. Kate Darling, Mr. Duane Ningaqsiq Smith, Mr. Graeme Reed and Chief Byron Louis.

Thank you all for joining us today.

The format is that each group of you, each organization, will be given up to 10 minutes for your presentation.

Then once all of the presentations are done—and, hopefully, Mr. Helin will be with us by that point—we will open the table to questions from members.

Mr. Craik, since you're first on the list, why don't we start with you, sir?

Mr. Brian Craik (Director, Federal Relations, Grand Council of the Crees (Eeyou Istchee)):

Thank you, Mr. Chair and Madam Vice-Chair. My name is Brian Craik and I'm the representative for federal issues for the Crees. I'm here in place of Mandy Gull, who I was supposed to be accompanied by, but she's ill and couldn't come.

The Cree of Eeyou Istchee do not suggest that our experience with energy projects necessarily holds lessons for others. Each case is unto itself and must be examined by the people who are searching for ways and means of moving ahead in the development of their communities.

In the past 40 years I've seen a radical change in the Crees of Eeyou Istchee with regard to energy and resource development. Forty years ago, development in our homeland was initiated and carried out by others with virtually no consultation or involvement of the Crees. Today this would be unthinkable. How did we get here from there?

In telling this story, I will review some of the major milestones of recent Cree history, which involve the signing of the James Bay and Northern Quebec Agreement, the fight against the the Great Whale River hydroelectric project and the paix des braves. Before thousands of Europeans came into Eeyou Istchee, which means the people's land, the Crees where there winning their livelihood from trapping, hunting and fishing.

For centuries after the first Europeans had their presence in the Eeyou Istchee, there was minimal change, for approximately 400 years. The change came in the 20th century. The fur trade had fallen off and had been built back up again in the early 20th century. The Government of Quebec and the Government of Canada established basic health and education services in our territory. The Cree children were sent to residential schools, with all that those entailed, and we're still fighting against the problems those made. However, more positively, there was a beaver conservation program in the 1930s, 1940s, 1950s and 1960s that actually revived the economy in James Bay. People weren't rich, but they were proud of their livelihood.

In 1971, the Quebec government announced the massive James Bay hydroelectric project. It was an enormous project that would radically affect the Crees and their traditional way of life. At the time, most of our people spent most of the year in the bush, carrying out our traditional activities. From one day to the next, they faced an assault of airplanes, helicopters, bulldozers and heavy trucks. Roads were blasted through our lands, and our rivers were dammed and diked. To our people, this was an invasion.

Quebec did not consult us or seek our consent for this development. Quebec said that the Crees had no rights to land that they had occupied for thousands of years. It was seen that the Crees had no rights to our environment and our way of life, the Crees had no rights. That began a court case called the James Bay case, the Kanatewat case. In 1973 Judge Albert Malouf made a judgment that granted an injunction to the James Bay project.

(1625)

This injunction was turned over after one week, but it scared the people who were financing these big projects. The Crees and Canada, the Inuit from northern Quebec and Quebec got together and negotiated an agreement. They spent two years negotiating it, and it was seen as a partnership. It was sold to the Crees and the Inuit as a partnership, a way to live together. The agreement is a complex document; it has 30 chapters. It has a land regime, local and regional government regimes. It has health, education, justice, police, economic development, community development and an innovative income security program to keep the economy of the Crees alive.

Section 22 of the agreement establishes an environmental and social protection regime, including the first environmental assessment and review process in Canada.

The Great Whale project is the next issue, and that arose in the 1980s and 1990s. Neither Quebec nor Canada lived up to the expectations of the Crees in terms of how Cree rights should be implemented. When Bourassa announced the Great Whale project, the Crees went to court against it, and they fought very hard to get this project stopped.

The Crees had signed an agreement with Canada and with Quebec, and although they signed an agreement, the agreement was not carried out by Quebec and Canada. The Great Whale River project was eventually shelved basically.

The paix des braves was the next issue. The Crees and Canada and Quebec were searching for a way to get together and to resolve their issues. Quebec and the Crees got together bilaterally and made an agreement. One thing you can take from this is that the Crees worked with the province, and they also worked with the federal government. They also, to some degree, worked with the Inuit in northern Quebec.

The paix des braves is a nation-to-nation agreement, and it's seen that way. Since the paix des braves was signed, the Crees have worked out other projects, and these projects have been basically designed to ease the fact that the projects before that, like the La Grande project, were causing huge problems. They cut off all of the flow in certain streams and caused problems for the ecology. There were problems with mercury in the fish and there were problems of all sorts, especially social problems.

Since the paix des braves, the Crees have found ways to work with Quebec, and it's been the difference between night and day.

Thank you.

(1630)

The Chair:

Thank you very much.

Mr. Helin, thank you very much for joining us. My apologies for the lengthy wait at security, but we started in your absence.

The process is that we're going to let each witness group do their presentation, and that will be followed by questions.

Mr. Smith.

Mr. Duane Ningaqsiq Smith (Chair and Chief Executive Officer, Inuvialuit Regional Corporation):

I'll apologize in advance if I am going a little quickly, because I think I have more than 10 minutes in my presentation here.

Thank you for the opportunity to speak before you today. First of all, my name is Duane Smith. You can just stick to the English name. I know my Inuvialuit name is a bit difficult. With me today is my general counsel, Kate Darling.

I come from what is known as the Inuvialuit settlement region. It's located in the very far northwest portion of Canada. It's only nine hours by jet, but you're still in Canada, so please come and visit sometime.

The area includes the land, ice and waters of the Mackenzie Delta, the Beaufort Sea and, of course, the Arctic Ocean. The area I represent is just under one million square kilometres, the vast majority of that, of course, is ocean or the Beaufort Sea. We have six communities in our region, either in the delta or along the coast. There are roughly 6,000 Inuvialuit beneficiaries.

In 1984 we signed the Inuvialuit Final Agreement, the modern-day treaty. It's a land claim agreement pursued in response to increasing development activities in our land and waters. It's the first comprehensive land claim agreement settled north of the 60th parallel and the second settled in Canada's history. It's also the first modern-day treaty to create a national park in mutual agreement. It also created a territorial park out of this.

The IFA belongs to the Inuvialuit and to Canada. I keep reiterating that, because Canada is a signatory to it. It has its responsibilities and obligations in regard to the implementation of that treaty, as do we.

In regard to our area, we're very resource rich but infrastructure poor. We hold trillions of cubic feet of natural gas, both onshore and offshore. It's a clean source of energy relative to other non-renewable sources of energy.

Since the construction of the Dempster Highway, infrastructure development in the Arctic has not had a strategic plan. There is a lack of commercial access to the ocean, local energy production facilities, adequate telecommunications, etc. I'm sure you've heard a lot of these issues and points made in the past already.

Regarding the energy insecurity in my region, as an example, we truck most of our energy needs from thousands of kilometres away, either from British Columbia or Alberta, to fuel the energy in the communities. This doesn't make sense to us when we're sitting on nine trillion cubic feet of gas.

The Dempster Highway is subject to frequent road closures and longer freeze-ups. There are two major water bodies that we have to cross, which don't have bridges, so there again is a lack of infrastructure. We have to wait for these water bodies to freeze up in the fall so that we can make ice crossings, and/or for it to melt away for the ferries to operate in the spring and throughout the summer.

Another example is the nearest city, if you can call it that—Whitehorse, with 24,000 people—is over 1,200 kilometres away on this road, so we're trucking the stuff roughly 2,000 kilometres to our community to provide energy. You can imagine the greenhouse gas emissions from that. We are subject, as well, to high transportation surcharges, and there's a limited number of companies that can supply this energy.

The region has very limited disposable income among residents and inability to pay more. Residents give up nutritious food, home repairs and opportunities for their kids so that they can pay for heat and power. The energy costs in our region are probably the highest in Canada.

There is a real desire to develop local energy resources, but infrastructure, again, is needed.

In regard to the geopolitical considerations, states with emerging economies and growing populations want cleaner energy due, in part, to costs associated with local pollution as well as international targets.

(1635)

committee hansard rnnr 21379 words - read the full entry at permanent link - comments: 0. Posted at 22:44 on February 05, 2019

2019-02-05 14:59 House intervention / intervention en chambre

Broadband Internet services, Oral questions, Rural communities

Communautés rurales, Questions orales, Services Internet à large bande

Mr. Speaker, access to high-speed Internet is still one of the most serious economic and social problems facing Canada's rural regions, and that includes Laurentides—Labelle. Our government and our team have already done a great deal of work, but we still have a long way to go.

Internet access is key for growing businesses, creating good jobs, getting our Canadian products to global markets and for opportunity in general.

The new Minister of Rural Economic Development has this issue as one of the key priorities in her mandate letter. Could she update the House and rural Canada on her plans for the Internet?

Monsieur le Président, l'accès à Internet à haute vitesse demeure l'un des problèmes économiques et sociaux les plus graves pour l'ensemble des régions rurales du Canada, autant dans la circonscription de Laurentides—Labelle qu'ailleurs. Énormément de travail a déjà été fait par notre gouvernement et par notre équipe, mais il nous reste encore beaucoup à faire.

L'accès à Internet est essentiel pour la croissance des entreprises, la création de bons emplois, l'acheminement des produits canadiens vers les marchés globaux et les occasions économiques en général.

La lettre de mandat de la nouvelle ministre du Développement économique rural établit cette question comme une priorité clé. La ministre pourrait-elle informer la Chambre et les Canadiens des régions rurales de ses plans concernant Internet?

Watch | Hansard

Ecoutez | Hansard

hansard parlchmbr qp tv 245 words - read the full entry at permanent link - comments: 0. Posted at 20:26 on February 05, 2019

2019-02-05 FAAE 125

Standing Committee on Foreign Affairs and International Development

(0845)

[English]

The Chair (Mr. Michael Levitt (York Centre, Lib.)):

Good morning, everyone. I would like to call to order meeting 125 of the Standing Committee on Foreign Affairs and International Development.

This is also our first session on the new study, which we will begin today, on Canada's support for international democratic development.

With that in mind, I would like to welcome our first two witnesses. We have Christopher MacLennan from the Department of Foreign Affairs, Trade and Development. He's the assistant deputy minister, global issues and development. We also have Shelley Whiting, director general, office of human rights, freedoms and inclusion.

We will ask you to provide your testimony. Then we will open it up to the members for questions.

Mr. MacLennan, please begin.

Mr. Christopher MacLennan (Assistant Deputy Minister, Global Issues and Development, Department of Foreign Affairs, Trade and Development):

Thank you very much. I will provide a brief statement on behalf of the department. Then both Shelley and I, obviously, will be very pleased to take any questions you might have.

I will mention off the top that I am assistant deputy minister responsible for, basically, the development assistance aspects of Canada's involvement in democracy promotion. Shelley is more involved on the foreign affairs side, which has to do mostly with our diplomacy and democratic promotion through other means.

Thank you very much for the opportunity to discuss our support, past and present, to democratic development. Promoting democracy abroad, as everybody here is aware, has been a long-time integral part of Canada's foreign policy and international assistance, but as the 2007 committee report noted, despite remarkable progress, in their words, “the continued forward march of democracy is no sure thing, and that in the current environment retreat is threatening progress.

I think this is truer today in 2019 than it probably was in 2007. Indeed, the growing threats to the progress of democratic development 12 years ago have now resulted in an overall retreat in democracy, according to most experts.

Popular discontent has appeared in many countries as a result of the failure of these governments to provide effective solutions to important and legitimate domestic issues such as unemployment, a lack of opportunity, inequality and mass migration. Moreover, malicious actors, including authoritarian regimes and their proxies, have increased their efforts to shape public opinion and perception so as to undermine democracy and more broadly the rules-based international order.

While foreign interference is not new, its impact has grown in scale and speed due to cheaper and more accessible digital technology and data. As a result, we have seen declining citizen confidence and engagement in democratic institutions, growing distress between governments and civil society, and the manipulation and discrediting of political parties and their processes.

Of particular concern is the shrinking civic space, one of the key pillars of democracy. The largest democratic declines have taken place in the areas of civil liberties, freedom of expression, freedom of association and assembly, civil society participation and media integrity. It is in this context that we're working today.[Translation]

For its part, Global Affairs Canada has adapted. In 2013, the Canadian International Development Agency and the Department of Foreign Affairs and International Trade were merged, which has resulted in a consistent use of government tools to promote democracy.

Canada's Minister of Foreign Affairs and the Minister of International Development have now both made the commitment set out in their mandate letter to defend the values of inclusive and accountable governance, including through the promotion of human rights, gender equality, the empowerment of women and girls, peaceful pluralism, and inclusion and respect for diversity.

In June 2017, the government adopted its feminist international aid policy, which emphasizes inclusive governance focused on democracy and political participation, human rights and the rule of law for all citizens, regardless of their gender identity or any other aspect of their identity. This policy underscores the Government of Canada's commitment to provide inclusive and human rights-based development assistance as recommended in the committee's 2007 study.

Global Affairs Canada supports a wide range of programs and initiatives in all regions of the world to promote inclusive governance. In working with a wide range of partners, we leverage the expertise of Canadian NGOs, multilateral organizations and international institutions, and the engagement of grassroots civil society. What we do and who we do it with depends a lot on local context; we often have to adapt and seize on opportunities as they arise.

Through a feminist approach, the government is giving priority to the leadership and political participation of women. For example, it is working with the Interparliamentary Union to strengthen women's decision-making in parliaments and increase the capacity of parliamentarians—women and men—to adopt gender-sensitive reforms and laws.

In countries like Indonesia and Kenya, Canada supports the equitable access of marginalized or vulnerable groups, including youth and persons with disabilities, to participate in electoral processes.

(0850)

In addition, Canada is providing up to $24 million to support electoral observation missions in Ukraine in preparation for the 2019 presidential and parliamentary elections, as well as to support longer-term and sustainable electoral reform.[English]

Globally, programming focused on inclusive governance in areas such as government and civil society, democracy and political participation, and the rule of law and human rights totalled approximately $293 million in 2017-18, with approximately $170 million channelled specifically to promoting democracy.

As mentioned previously, Canada's efforts in this domain are not limited to international development assistance. As part of its feminist foreign policy, Canada has taken actions to strengthen democracy and resilience in peaceful and inclusive societies, at both the international level and through our work through our network of missions abroad.

In the G7, Canada has been a vocal supporter of democratic values. As part of our 2018 presidency, we spearheaded a joint declaration with G7 members that held up democracy as critical in defending against foreign threats. At the G7 summit in Charlevoix, leaders announced the G7 rapid response mechanism. This mechanism strengthens G7 coordination in identifying and responding to diverse and evolving threats to G7 democratic processes. The coordination unit is hosted in Canada on an ongoing basis.

Furthermore, through our broad network of diplomatic missions, Canada engages government officials of other like-minded states and civil society partners to advocate for and provide support to democratic development in those countries. Depending on the context, this is done through quiet diplomacy or through more public and open dialogue. This includes Canada's support for international election observation missions, including the deployment of hundreds of Canadians in recent years as observers, and co-sponsoring resolutions on human rights defenders in supporting their participation in international fora. Our missions are also provided with the “Voices at risk” guidelines to support and protect human rights defenders.

In conclusion, Global Affairs Canada welcomes the committee's interest in what we all agree is an important priority area.

We look forward to taking your questions.

The Chair:

Wonderful. Thank you very much.

We are going to begin with MP Alleslev, please.

Ms. Leona Alleslev (Aurora—Oak Ridges—Richmond Hill, CPC):

Thank you very much for being here today.

This is certainly an important topic, and it's somewhat disconcerting. You're saying, if I understand you correctly, that democracy is in retreat.

We continue to invest and our investment hasn't drastically changed over the last 12 years.

If we continue on this path, what level of confidence do we have that the outcome will be different? Can you help us to understand the critical performance indicators? How do we know that the efforts we're making are achieving the objectives?

(0855)

Mr. Christopher MacLennan:

This is a very difficult space to work in. In international development, everybody knows that we work in some of the most difficult places in the world with what is, relatively speaking, a very small amount of money to make a difference.

There are some types of development assistance where the opportunities are pretty direct to understanding what an investment will get you in terms of a return on your dollar. For example, when we invest in vaccinations, we have a clear understanding of how much the vaccination costs and what you get in return, which is a life saved if that person never contracts the disease.

This is fundamentally a different type of programming. Every country has a different culture, different understandings of governance, and all governance, as we understand in Canada, of course—

Ms. Leona Alleslev:

That's very fair, but I'm sorry, I don't have much time.

Of course, we understand the challenges. That's why we have experts like you to deal with those challenges. We need to be able to tell Canadian society that we're doing the right thing but that our investments, our efforts, are in fact achieving objectives and outcomes.

Can you please help us to understand how we are measuring that and, if democracy is in retreat, what are we doing differently that will achieve a different outcome?

Mr. Christopher MacLennan:

One of the things we're doing is placing a greater focus on working to ensure that there is a greater understanding at local levels, and a greater inclusion at local levels of a broader group of participation. In some of the places in which we're working, obviously the democratic space has been constricting. What we're trying to do is open up that democratic space.

We are doing that by ensuring that all communities are able to take part in democratic processes. For example, we're providing support to local women's organizations through the women's voice and leadership program to allow them to advocate on behalf of women's rights, including their right to take part in political processes. We are also working with LGBTQ groups to help them understand and exercise their rights within the context of the countries in which we're working.

The overall question of the retreat of democracy is obviously taking place at a global level, in terms of some of the Freedom House indices and whatnot. That's a really difficult indicator to move, because it's operating at a global perspective. What our programming attempts to achieve is to work at local levels, working directly with governments that are willing to work with us to strengthen their institutions, whether it be judicial institutions, their audit functions, to try to promote a better understanding of democracy.

Ms. Leona Alleslev:

committee faae hansard 34133 words - read the full entry at permanent link - comments: 0. Posted at 22:44 on February 05, 2019

2019-01-31 ETHI 133

Standing Committee on Access to Information, Privacy and Ethics

(1530)

[English]

The Chair (Mr. Bob Zimmer (Prince George—Peace River—Northern Rockies, CPC)):

Welcome, everybody.

Per the notice of meeting this is meeting 133 of the Standing Committee on Access to Information, Privacy and Ethics. The study is on the privacy of digital government services.

Today we have with us somebody we've had several times before, Daniel Therrien, Privacy Commissioner of Canada. We also have Gregory Smolynec, deputy commissioner, policy and promotion sector, and Lara Ives, executive director, policy, research and parliamentary affairs directorate.

Before I go to Mr. Therrien, I want to go to Mr. Kent quickly.

Hon. Peter Kent (Thornhill, CPC):

Thank you, Chair.

Colleagues, I hope I'll get unanimous consent on this. In light of yesterday's announcement by the Minister of Democratic Institutions of this new panel to screen advertising, messaging and reporting during the upcoming election, I'd like to suggest that we allocate at least one meeting to call representatives of some of the seven organizations that the minister said would be looking to screen acceptable reportage and advertising.

The Chair:

Mr. Angus.

Mr. Charlie Angus (Timmins—James Bay, NDP):

If I hear the suggestion correctly, I think it would be worth our while. As with all-party unanimous recommendations about protecting the electoral system, our committee brought forward recommendations. I think it's worth our having a view on this.

It seems to me that I'm looking at something that's probably much more fitted to a plan right now that deals with cybersecurity and cyber-threats, whereas what we've found in threats to elections are much more subtle. The manipulations might be harder to find.

It would be good to see if these representatives have looked at our work and we can question them on it. I would be very much in favour of that.

The Chair:

Mr. Saini.

Mr. Raj Saini (Kitchener Centre, Lib.):

I don't mind, but I'd prefer a formal motion so at least I can think about exactly what you want and which organizations they are.

Hon. Peter Kent:

Sure.

Mr. Raj Saini:

We would absolutely entertain it.

Hon. Peter Kent:

It's not required. I've moved it now. Let's vote on it now. If you see fit to defeat it, then we'll do a formal vote.

Mr. Nathaniel Erskine-Smith (Beaches—East York, Lib.):

Can you repeat the exact language?

Hon. Peter Kent:

In light of the announcement made by the minister yesterday with regard to the special panel being created with representatives across—

The Chair:

The security task force, I think it is.

Hon. Peter Kent:

—the security task force, including Privy Council, CSIS—the seven organizations that were named.. We would invite them to find out exactly how they consider their new assignment, and perhaps give them a few weeks to get their heads around it. I assume they knew about it before the minister announced it yesterday, but it would be to have them talk about what they consider their mission to be, and how they'll carry it out.

The minister yesterday wasn't able to speak about where the red lines would be drawn in alerting Canadians to potential violation, or the intention of the panel, but I think it would be helpful, particularly given the work that we've done on this specifically for the past year.

The Chair:

Is it Raj next and then Charlie?

Mr. Charlie Angus:

I have language for a motion.

The Chair:

Okay. Go ahead, Mr. Angus.

Mr. Charlie Angus:

It's, “That the committee invite the appointed security task force of the seven organizations”—we could name them—“to brief the committee on their role in protecting the integrity of the Canadian electoral system for the 2019 election.”

The Chair:

Just to be clear, are you providing words for Mr. Kent?

Mr. Charlie Angus:

Yes. He was explaining what he wanted, but I think what we want very simply is a briefing from the appointed security task force on their role and plan for protecting the integrity of Canada's electoral system.

Hon. Peter Kent:

Chair, I can give you the specific list now; the app has loaded: the Clerk of the Privy Council, the federal national security and intelligence adviser, the deputy minister of justice, the deputy minister of public safety, and the deputy minister of global affairs Canada. It's a pretty esteemed panel.

The Chair:

Ms. Fortier.

(1535)

Mrs. Mona Fortier (Ottawa—Vanier, Lib.):

I would like to adjourn the debate on the motion and let the commissioner present.

The Chair:

committee ethi hansard 21612 words - read the full entry at permanent link - comments: 0. Posted at 22:44 on January 31, 2019

2019-01-31 INDU 146

Standing Committee on Industry, Science and Technology

(1035)

[English]

The Chair (Mr. Dan Ruimy (Pitt Meadows—Maple Ridge, Lib.)):

Mr. Graham.

Mr. David de Burgh Graham (Laurentides—Labelle, Lib.):

I move that we approve and report back the supplementary estimates (B) at this time.

The Chair:

Mr. Albas.

Mr. Dan Albas (Central Okanagan—Similkameen—Nicola, CPC):

I'd like to state, for the record, that I believe, in having this motion go forward without having the capacity to bring in the minister or officials for us to review, that, on principle, we are not doing our job as parliamentarians. The public should judge this move by what it is, a deflection of our parliamentary duties and functions in this place.

The Chair:

We have a motion on the floor. We'll go to a vote.

Mr. Dan Albas:

I would like a recorded vote.

(Motion agreed to: yeas 6; nays 3 [See Minutes of Proceedings])

The Chair:

The motion is adopted.

The meeting is adjourned.

Comité permanent de l'industrie, des sciences et de la technologie

(1035)

[Traduction]

Le président (M. Dan Ruimy (Pitt Meadows—Maple Ridge, Lib.)):

Monsieur Graham, vous avez la parole.

M. David de Burgh Graham (Laurentides—Labelle, Lib.):

Je propose d'approuver le Budget supplémentaire des dépenses (B) et d'en faire rapport maintenant.

Le président:

Allez-y, monsieur Albas.

M. Dan Albas (Central Okanagan—Similkameen—Nicola, PCC):

Je tiens à mentionner, pour le compte rendu, que je crois que l'adoption de cette motion sans avoir pu faire venir devant nous le ministre ou des fonctionnaires à des fins d'examen revient, en principe, à ne pas faire notre travail de parlementaires. La population devrait juger cette façon de procéder pour ce qu'elle est, à savoir une façon de se dérober à nos devoirs et à nos fonctions parlementaires au sein du Comité.

Le président:

Nous sommes saisis d'une motion. Nous allons la mettre aux voix.

M. Dan Albas:

J'aimerais un vote par appel nominal.

(La motion est adoptée par 6 voix contre 3. [Voir le Procès-verbal])

Le président:

La motion est adoptée.

La séance est levée.

Hansard

Hansard

committee hansard indu 332 words - read the full entry at permanent link - comments: 0. Posted at 22:44 on January 31, 2019

2019-01-29 ETHI 132

Standing Committee on Access to Information, Privacy and Ethics

(1535)

[English]

The Chair (Mr. Bob Zimmer (Prince George—Peace River—Northern Rockies, CPC)):

Good day, everybody. Welcome back—it's 2019—to the Standing Committee on Access to Information, Privacy and Ethics, meeting 132.

Before we get to our guests, we have some committee business. We have a couple of things. It's not necessary to go in camera.

Most of us in this room know about the international grand committee and the work we did in London. Charlie, Nathaniel and I went over in late November to join eight other countries to talk about this. Canada is picking up the torch where they left off. We're going to host it in Ottawa on May 28; that's what we're proposing. We looked at a date that would work for everybody, or as much as we could make that work, and May 28 seems to be the date.

I wanted to put that before the committee to make sure that we have your approval to move forward with it. It will be an all-day meeting, similar to what happened in London. It will start in the morning. We'll have meetings all throughout the day. We'll likely end the day at 4:30. Then we'll proceed into other things.

Mr. Raj Saini (Kitchener Centre, Lib.):

What day of the week is that?

The Chair:

It's a Tuesday.

Mr. Raj Saini:

Okay. Good.

The Chair:

I wanted to get some feedback on that. Perhaps you could raise your hand or give me a, “Yes, we're good to go”.

Mr. Nathaniel Erskine-Smith (Beaches—East York, Lib.):

Yes, we're good to go.

The Chair:

Nate, you wanted to speak to it. Go ahead.

Mr. Nathaniel Erskine-Smith:

To the extent that you need direction from the committee, I would say that your direction as chair is to act on our behalf to make arrangements as necessary to make this happen in Canada, to invite the parliamentarians and the countries that participated in the U.K., at a bare minimum, and if we want to expand it further, to work to do so.

The Chair:

Perfect.

Is that enough direction?

Mr. Kent.

Hon. Peter Kent (Thornhill, CPC):

Mr. Chair, what are the requirements with regard to the financial support for a meeting like this? Would this have to go to the liaison committee ?

The Chair:

It's a good question. There's a limit of about $40,000, so it's keeping it below that. I don't think that will be a problem.

Mike.

The Clerk of the Committee (Mr. Michael MacPherson):

Basically, this is what we would be looking for. We would be reimbursing witnesses who appeared at committee just as we would for a regular committee meeting. However, members coming from other jurisdictions, let's say from the House of Commons in England or from Australia or wherever, would be paying their own way to come here, just as we paid our own way to go to the first one.

Hon. Peter Kent:

What about for our facility usage?

The Chair:

Go ahead, Mike.

The Clerk:

We'll be fine. We'll have a budget to cover all that.

Hon. Peter Kent:

Good.

The Chair:

We'll be working a lot with Mike and the analysts to make sure it all comes to fruition. We want to make it an event that is really the next step in what we've already done. We look forward to it.

Hon. Peter Kent:

Yes.

The Chair:

Do you have any comments, Mr. Angus?

Mr. Charlie Angus (Timmins—James Bay, NDP):

No. We certainly want to move ahead with this, so I say you have the mandate to take the steps necessary. We can come back and discuss the theme and what it is the international community is going to want to talk about. We can do that at a later date.

Mr. Nathaniel Erskine-Smith:

Perhaps the analysts can mock up a proposal for us. I only would note that Sheryl Sandberg is on an apology tour; so there you have it.

The Chair:

We will keep a list of witnesses and keep you informed about who we're asking to the function. I think that name came up as one that will be on the list.

Do members have anything more to say about the international grand committee? Do we have sufficient direction?

Thank you, everybody. We'll pursue that.

committee ethi hansard 30075 words - read the full entry at permanent link - comments: 0. Posted at 22:44 on January 29, 2019

2018-19 Winter newsletter / infolettre hiver 2018-19

A Word From David

Dear friends,

For a little more than three years now, every one of my newsletters has touched on a variety of topics of general interest to our community. In spring 2017, for example, we discussed the protection of our lakes and waterways, and, in the following edition, we looked at the local aviation industry. For every newsletter, my team and I have contacted many historical societies, museums and heritage committees in the riding. I want to shine a light on those groups today.

In the 1980s, my father was involved in the Corporation des Gares des Laurentides and the Comité du Patrimoine in Sainte-Agathe, groups built around saving the Canadian Pacific railway stations along the key railway infrastructure that enabled our region to develop a world-renowned linear park. By their actions, my parents taught me the importance of understanding and preserving our history, and I saw that they were not the only ones who strove to promote our heritage.

We are surrounded by reminders of our history. The signs on heritage trails, the murals, cenotaphs, commemorative plaques, old buildings, crossroads, place names, streets and period photographs, as well as the museums and historical exhibitions, all ensure that we will remember. For residents, they are a source of pride and, for visitors to our tourist region, they lend meaning and depth.

In the historical societies, municipalities and public libraries and on the web, our archives, tales and written works teach us about the past and refresh our memory. Hundreds of citizens are involved in all these groups and organizations. I want to acknowledge them, honour their passion and their incredible work and thank them publicly for the effort they make to ensure we never forget.

We live in a time of major transition as progressive changes transform Canadian society. We have legalized marijuana. We have entered into an agreement in principle to replace NAFTA with the USMCA. We have rolled out our anti-pollution plan because we must act now to address climate change. This year, we will have to decide on the future we want to shape for our country, for our region, for every one of us and for future generations. It will be for the historians to say what happened before and after our time.

Best wishes for 2019!

- David

Mot de David

Chers amis,

Depuis maintenant un peu plus de trois ans, chacune de mes Infolettres porte un regard sur de nombreux sujets d’intérêt général pour notre communauté. Par exemple, au printemps 2017, nous avons discuté de la protection de nos lacs et plans d’eau et dans l’édition suivante, nous avons abordé le sujet de l’industrie locale de l’aviation. Pour chaque édition de l’Infolettre, mon équipe et moi avons été en contact avec plusieurs sociétés d’histoire, musées et comités du patrimoine de la circonscription. Ce sont ces groupes que je souhaite mettre de l’avant aujourd’hui.

Durant les années ’80, mon père a été impliqué au sein de la Corporation des Gares et du Comité du patrimoine de Sainte-Agathe, mis sur pied entre autres pour sauver la gare de Sainte-Agathe – qui appartenait au Canadian Pacific – et plusieurs autres bâtisses du genre, le long de cette infrastructure ferroviaire fondamentale qui avait permis le développement de notre région et qui est devenue un parc linéaire de renommée mondiale. Par leurs actions, mes parents m’ont enseigné l’importance de comprendre et préserver notre histoire. Ils n’étaient assurément pas les seuls à travailler à la mise en valeur de notre patrimoine.

Nous sommes entourés de rappels de notre histoire. Les panneaux de circuits patrimoniaux, les murales, les cénotaphes, les plaques commémoratives, les bâtiments du passé, les croix de chemin, les noms de lieux et rues, les photos d’époque ainsi que les musées et expositions historiques nous convient à ne jamais oublier. Pour les résidents, ils sont source de fierté. Pour les visiteurs de notre région touristique, ils sont source d’intérêt et de souvenirs.

Dans les sociétés d’histoire, les municipalités et les bibliothèques publiques et sur le web; archives, récits et ouvrages écrits nous enseignent le passé ou nous rafraichissent la mémoire. Des centaines de citoyens sont impliqués au sein de tous ces groupes et organisations. Je veux les saluer, honorer leur passion et leur travail incroyable et les remercier publiquement de s’investir à perpétuer le souvenir !

Nous sommes dans une période de transition fondamentale, alors que des changements progressistes transforment la société canadienne. Nous avons légalisé la marijuana. Nous avons convenu d’un accord de principe pour remplacer l’ALENA par l’AEUMC. Nous avons mis en branle notre plan de lutte à la pollution, parce que nous devons agir maintenant pour contrer les changements climatiques. Nous aurons cette année à nous prononcer sur l’avenir que nous souhaitons définir, pour notre pays, pour notre région, pour chacun d’entre nous et les futures générations. Ce sera aux historiens de raconter l’avant et l’après de notre époque d’aujourd’hui.

En vous offrant mes meilleurs vœux pour l’année 2019.
Bonne lecture !

- David

KNOWING OUR REGION: Then and now...

As the saying goes, “You have to know where you come from to know where you’re going.” In the past three years, my father, local historian Joseph Graham, has passed on various parts of our regional history via this Newsletter. For this edition, he takes us back to the origins of his interest in history and his desire to transmit that passion. Happy reading!

CONNAÎTRE NOTRE RÉGION : d’hier à aujourd’hui...

Il y a un adage qui dit: ``il faut savoir d’où l’on vient pour savoir où l’on va``. Au cours des trois dernières années, mon père, l’historien local Joseph Graham, nous a présenté différents pans de notre histoire régionale via cette Infolettre. Pour cette nouvelle édition, il nous transporte vers les origines de son intérêt pour l’histoire et son désir de transmettre cette passion. Bonne lecture !

Memories and a sense of belonging

Growing up Catholic in Val Morin, the saints, martyrs and apostles imbued me with a sense of belonging, of being one of the faithful. Pope John XXIII was going to read a letter from Our Lady of Fatima in 1960, it was going to change the world. We were to be a part of that story. He declined to read it, though, and so other stories crowded in. The Catholic Church began to fade. Still, I hungered for stories that I could feel a part of. I was not alone. Throughout the ’60s and ’70s a whole generation was looking for their story.

My uncle, Antoine Paré, began to fill my aching need, my hunger. Documenting the family history, he told how my grandfather Alphonse grew up in Franco-Manitoba where his widowed father, Louis Paré, served as a surgeon with the North-West Mounted Police, that he had been born in 1885, the year his father took an arrow at the Battle of Batoche, that his mother had died before he knew her, succumbing to tuberculosis, and that he grew up speaking four Canadian languages, French, English, Ojibwa and Cree. I learned of his unlikely meeting of my grandmother, an Irish Australian who grew up in the Western Australian desert in a waterless mining camp, who received a set of wooden teeth for her 18th birthday, and how, as a couple with five children, they came by train to Val Morin in 1920 and over the next years had four more.

As I was learning the history of the members of my family, the railway that had brought them here was making headlines. It was the mid-1980s and CP Rail was shutting down Le P’tit Train du Nord. The line was the spinal cord that tied the whole of the Laurentians together and was too important to lose. That’s when I made some new friends who shared my concern: Yvan Dubois from Val-Morin, Gleason Théberge from Prévost, Terry Turcot and Denise Goulet from Sainte-Agathe, Adrien Grégoire from L’Annonciation and Jacques Brisebois from MontLaurier. We asked questions, knocked on doors and demanded answers. Pierre de Bellefeuille, from Canadian Pacific, helped me understand the colossal scope of the company, and I discovered how generous it was with its institutional memory. I wanted to know the whole story.

I learned about Augustin-Norbert Morin who paddled up the North River with a dream – to establish a farming community at the furthest reach of his paddle. I learned of his successor, Father Antoine Labelle, who walked up the First Nations’ trails and colonists’ paths north of Morin’s colony and visited the huge lumber industry properties beyond La Repousse and Grand Brûlé, the farms built to feed the loggers and the raftsmen – the famous pitounes – on the Lièvre and Rouge rivers. I learned of the Fermes d’en Bas, du Milieu and d’en Haut, farms that subsequently became the parishes of La Conception, L’Annonciation and l’Ascension. I learned that the “bon curé” Father Labelle saw Ste. Agathe’s inhabitants suffer through droughts and a flagging market and how he dreamed of a way to tie all these communities together with a railroad that would follow his footsteps north from St. Jerome. We began to circulate the stories, and, as a result of talking, we created organizations to preserve the railway and its stations.

Just as my family’s history had been shared with me, our collective history was unfolding before me. I learned how the indigenous peoples had trouble surviving, and how buildings and communities had disappeared forever. I learned how, largely as a result of the railway, skiing and the treatment for tuberculosis arrived in our region at the same time, assuring its prosperity. I came to know the community of which I was a part, where it had come from and its role in a much broader history. I discovered who we are. I learned that you develop this sense of belonging to something bigger than yourself simply by valuing and sharing your experience. I learned how the past shaped the way I belong to the present.

- Joseph Graham

Souvenirs et sentiment d’appartenance

Lorsque j’étais jeune, à Val-Morin, les récits des saints, des martyrs et des apôtres ont tranquillement forgé en moi un sentiment d’appartenance, parmi les fidèles de l’église catholique. En 1960, le pape Jean XXIII allait nous lire un message de Notre-Dame-de-Fatima. Nous allions participer à un événement qui allait changer le monde, mais il n’a finalement pas lu ce message. Par conséquence, les autres récits commencèrent à s’estomper tranquillement. Je cherchais des histoires pour lesquelles je me serais senti impliqué, et je n’étais pas le seul. Durant les années ’60 et ’70, toute une génération cherchait son histoire.

C’est mon oncle, Antoine Paré, qui a commencé à combler ce besoin, cette quête. Il m’a raconté la vie de mon grand-père, Alphonse Paré, qui a grandi avec son père, puisque sa mère étais morte de la tuberculose alors qu’il était tout jeune. Son père travaillait comme chirurgien pour la police montée du Nord-Ouest dans un village francophone du Manitoba. Alphonse est né en 1885, l’année où son père a été atteint par une flèche à la bataille de Batoche. Il a grandi en apprenant à parler quatre langues canadiennes: le français, l’anglais, l’ojibwé et le cri. J’ai aussi appris la trame de son improbable rencontre avec ma grand-mère, une Australienne d’origine irlandaise. Elle avait même reçu un dentier en bois pour son 18 e anniversaire, elle qui avait grandi dans un camp minier dépourvu d’eau, dans le désert de l’ouest de l’Australie. En 1920, alors qu’ils avaient cinq enfants, mes grands-parents se sont installés à Val-Morin, où sont nés quatre enfants de plus.

Alors que j’apprenais l’histoire des membres de ma famille, le chemin de fer qui les avait amené ici faisait les manchettes. Nous sommes au milieu des années ‘80, et le Canadien Pacifique s’apprête à fermer Le P’tit Train du Nord. Puisque cette ligne ferroviaire relie les Laurentides d’un bout à l’autre, il m’est impensable qu’elle soit condamnée.

C’est alors que je rencontre de nouveaux amis qui ont les mêmes préoccupations que moi : Yvan Dubois de Val-Morin, Gleason Théberge de Prévost, Terry Turcot et Denise Goulet de Sainte-Agathe, Adrien Grégoire de L’Annonciation et Jacques Brisebois de Mont- Laurier. Nous posons des questions; frappons à plusieurs portes; exigeons des réponses. Pierre de Bellefeuille, du Canadien Pacifique, m’aide à saisir la taille colossale de l’entreprise, et je découvre à quel point cette dernière est généreuse en ce qui concerne sa mémoire institutionnelle. Je veux connaitre toute l’histoire.

Je prends connaissance de l’épopée d’Augustin-Norbert Morin, qui a remonté la rivière du Nord avec un rêve : établir une communauté agricole le plus loin où il pourrait se rendre par la force de son aviron. J’en apprends plus à propos de son successeur, le curé Antoine Labelle, qui a parcouru les sentiers des Autochtones. Il s’est rendu jusqu’aux colonies du nord; celles avec leurs énormes installations de l’industrie du bois, qui sont plus loin que La Repousse et Grand-Brûlé, ces fermes construites pour nourrir les forestiers et les draveurs qui envoyaient des billots – les fameuses pitounes – sur la rivière du Lièvre et la rivière Rouge. Ces travailleurs provenaient notamment des Fermes d’en Bas, du Milieu et d’en Haut, des fermes devenues des paroisses : La Conception, L’Annonciation et l’Ascension. J’apprends que le bon Curé a vu les habitants de Sainte-Agathe aux prises avec des sécheresses et un marché déficient et qu’il rêvait d’un chemin de fer qui relierait tous ces villages à partir de Saint-Jérôme. Comme d’autres, j’ai alors commencé à faire circuler ces histoires. À force de parler, nous avons créé des organisations pour préserver la ligne ferroviaire et ses stations.

Pendant que j’apprenais l’histoire de ma famille, notre histoire collective déferlait devant moi. J’ai appris comment les Autochtones ont eu de la difficulté à survivre; comment des édifices et des communautés disparaissent à jamais. J’ai appris comment, en grande partie grâce au chemin de fer, le ski et le traitement contre la tuberculose sont arrivés en même temps dans notre région, assurant ainsi sa prospérité. J’ai appris à connaître la communauté dont je faisais partie; d’où elle venait; son rôle dans une histoire beaucoup plus grande. J’ai découvert qui nous sommes. J’ai appris que ce sentiment de faire partie de quelque chose de plus grand que soi se développe simplement en partageant et en valorisant notre vécu. Les souvenirs d’autrefois ont forgé mon appartenance d’aujourd’hui.

- Joseph Graham

View the original publication.

Voir la publication originale.

history newsletter 2382 words - read the full entry at permanent link - comments: 0. Posted at 22:41 on December 31, 2018

2018-12-13 PROC 139

Standing Committee on Procedure and House Affairs

(1250)

[English]

The Chair (Hon. Larry Bagnell (Yukon, Lib.)):

Welcome back to the 139th meeting. We just want to close up on a few informal and hopefully fun things for the last words in the year 2018.

One is that the committee is excited and should be complimented that, because of its work, indigenous languages have started to be used officially in the House. On page 24,766 of the Commons Debates, the Honourable Hunter Tootoo, member for Nunavut, made a short statement in Inuktitut that's in Hansard in the symbols of Inuktitut. That's the first time. It's great to have that on the record.

Also, while we're doing closing Christmas statements, I want to apologize to Mr. Reid, who suggested a few weeks ago—which I totally agreed with and wanted to do—that we have another one of our informal dinners to discuss the future of the committee. Unfortunately, I never organized it. As I said when I came to Parliament at the beginning, my bias is to actually accomplish things, and I think those types of meetings lead us to think about concrete achievements that we can do, like the item I just mentioned. We have a lot of talent on this committee.

Mr. Scott Reid (Lanark—Frontenac—Kingston, CPC):

With that in mind, the next opportunity we'll have to do this would be in the new year and in the new House. There is a restaurant there. Am I right?

The Chair:

Yes. It's smaller, one third the size, but yes.

Mr. Scott Reid:

Okay, but it's big enough for us, especially if we get a reservation in early. Thinking of that, if it's agreeable to members, why don't we consider having an informal meeting of the members? We're back on the Monday, I assume. Would the Tuesday night be...?

Mr. David de Burgh Graham (Laurentides—Labelle, Lib.):

Or we could have an informal luncheon at our old committee spot that Thursday.

Mr. David Christopherson (Hamilton Centre, NDP):

We should probably do it before the debate about this document, or everyone may not be there.

Some hon. members: Oh, oh!

Mr. Scott Reid:

Or after, I suppose....

Mr. David Christopherson:

Maybe both: one at the front and one at the back....

The Chair:

Let's leave it a little flexible, but I'll try to organize something.

Mr. Scott Reid:

Okay. It would be really a super idea, I think.

If I might say this, just as a thought, what I had in mind was this. As we approach the end of a parliamentary term—it's a fairly predictable ending time—we could find our agenda jammed up with material that is hard to get through entirely. Alternatively, we could find ourselves with unexpected amounts of free space, which could be used for some items that are not on the public's radar screen. We could do some useful low-key work there that is probably achievable by means of consensus, but sometimes some prep work is required, and if we haven't thought about that in advance, we might miss our chance. That's really where I think the kind of business that could be discussed at that meeting might go.

The Chair:

Just to throw some totally irrelevant information into the situation using my prerogative as chair—this will be discussed at the dinner—I've mentioned before that all the northern nations in the world now have electronic voting in their parliaments as an option. I learned this morning from the clerk that they've checked the United States. Of the 100 legislatures in the United States, something in the order of 90 out of 100 have electronic voting.

Mr. Scott Reid:

Is that the upper or the lower Houses in all the states?

The Chair:

It's lower and upper.

Mr. Christopherson, go ahead.

(1255)

Mr. David Christopherson:

I'd like to build on Mr. Reid's idea.

Again, it stems from Mr. Simms' comments at our previous meeting about Centre Block and that whole second chamber idea. That has to start somewhere. Right now it's in the past. We refer to discussions we had about it and the interest that some of us had in seeing that as a welcome addition, possibly, to our current parliamentary process. Maybe in the times that Mr. Reid is identifying, this could be one of the things that we start doing, some of that work to help inform the next Parliament, which will be tasked with making some decisions about what will happen with the temporary chamber we're about to move into.

To repeat myself, it makes that discussion current. Even if we just issued a report that said we've talked about it and here are some thoughts, that would put it on the political radar and it would be there so it wouldn't get lost. I really think that's probably one of the biggest potential changes that could find agreement, in my humble opinion, in future parliaments. There could be room for that kind of a major reform, which would be significant. They would only do it if it was possible, and we've talked about the benefits of it. We haven't looked at all the pitfalls, which there are bound to be, too.

All of that is to say that I like Mr. Reid's idea, and if we have time, let's do some work that otherwise we wouldn't have the opportunity to do. We're all that much more experienced now at the end of this Parliament. For some people, it's the end of their first parliament. For others, it's polishing up after a number of parliaments. We're all stronger and, I'd like to think, smarter and more experienced now. It's that kind of a discussion. It's non-partisan and shouldn't, in any way, affect the silly season that we're going to be in as we get into the pre-election time. All that is to add my voice that maybe that is one of those unique ideas or special ideas we could look at that would be planting a seed for future parliaments. It would be to talk about that second chamber and how we might be able to advance opportunities for, especially, private members to have more time, more say, and more priority.

Thanks.

The Chair:

I'll take that advice and that input, not only to the dinner for this committee but also to the subcommittee on agenda.

Mr. David Christopherson:

Yes.

The Chair:

I just want to go around the table before we leave, because it's Christmas.

Mr. Nater and I already made some closing comments. I'll go around if anyone else wants to say anything, not only to wrap up this year but to wrap up the three years we've had together. We've never done that, so if anyone wants to make any comments, go ahead.

I did have a suggested motion that we see the clock at June, but I won't follow up on that.

Some hon. members: Oh, oh!

The Chair: We'll start with Stephanie, and then anyone who wants to make any closing remarks before the holidays.

Stephanie, go ahead.

Mrs. Stephanie Kusie (Calgary Midnapore, CPC):

Merry Christmas. Happy new year. Happy Hanukkah. Happy Kwanza.

See you next year.

committee hansard proc 7095 words - read the full entry at permanent link - comments: 0. Posted at 22:44 on December 13, 2018

2018-12-11 PROC 138

Standing Committee on Procedure and House Affairs

(1100)

[English]

The Chair (Hon. Larry Bagnell (Yukon, Lib.)):

Good morning. Welcome to the 138th meeting of the Standing Committee on Procedure and House Affairs. This meeting is being televised.

Committee members, there is going to be a vote. Is it okay with you if we carry on until about 10 minutes before the vote?

Some hon. members: Agreed.

The Chair: Then we'll come back. I think people have a lot of questions, and this is a very important meeting.

I'd really like to thank all of our people for coming. Thank you for agreeing to my request to come. Thank you to the Clerk of the House of Commons for agreeing as well to my request to have this meeting, which I hope will be the beginning of a few. In response to the committee's request, the House administration organized today's briefing on the Centre Block rehabilitation project.

From the House, we are pleased to be joined by Stéphan Aubé, chief information officer; Susan Kulba, senior director and executive architect, real property directorate; and Lisette Comeau, senior architectural strategist, real property directorate. Here from Centrus Architects are Larry Malcic, lead representative, and Duncan Broyd, functional program lead. As well, we have Rob Wright, assistant deputy minister, parliamentary precinct branch, from Public Services and Procurement Canada.

Welcome as well to Jennifer Garrett.

You're with...?

Ms. Jennifer Garrett (Director General, Centre Block Program, Department of Public Works and Government Services):

I'm with Public Services.

The Chair:

Okay.

I want to mention that in the Hill Times you have in front of you, the Speaker has written an article. I just want to read one quote from it, on why this meeting is so important. It states: That is why the design process will involve parliamentarians. Their understanding and their perspectives on the workings of Canada’s parliamentary democracy are essential to the design. As the caretakers of our parliamentary democracy, they must be engaged throughout the process in a substantial way.

Parliamentarians are not architects or engineers. We wouldn't get into those details, but Parliament wouldn't be here without parliamentarians. That's why it's here. They know from their experience what works and what doesn't. They have very valuable input. It's very important.

You know, when I choose a home, I get to design it so that it works for the things I need. I don't do the engineering of it or anything. That's why it's very important that we have this meeting and have, as the Speaker mentioned, ongoing participation throughout the process. This is very important. We really appreciate your coming here and having all this expertise so that we know how and when we will be able to continue this process to make sure that our input is instrumental in the design.

I'm not sure how many people will be making opening comments.

Who will do the opening comments?

(1105)

Mr. Stéphan Aubé (Chief Information Officer, House of Commons):

Susan Kulba will, Mr. Bagnell.

The Chair:

Okay.

There are lots of questions, so if we have to extend...or we'll see what we'll do if we can't get through them all.

You're on. Thank you very much.

Ms. Susan Kulba (Senior Director and Executive Architect, Real Property Directorate, House of Commons):

Thank you.[Translation]

My name is Susan Kulba, and I am the Senior Director and Executive Architect of the House of Commons.[English]

I'm here today with the team who's responsible for the Centre Block project. I'm under digital services and real property at the House of Commons, led by the CIO, Stéphan Aubé. With me is one of the architects on my team, Lisette Comeau, who's the architectural strategist for heritage.

We have with us also Larry Malcic, who is from Centrus. It's a design consortium that's been hired by PSPC for the Centre Block program. He's the lead representative. Duncan Broyd is the functional program lead representative.

We have Rob Wright, the ADM from PSPC who is responsible for the overall program, and Jennifer Garrett, the director general of PSPC who is responsible for Centre Block.

We thank the committee very much for inviting us here today to hear from you and to engage with you. It's an opportune time in the project. We're in the functional requirement gathering phase of the project, and it's very important to us to have the input from parliamentarians. You represent Canadians all over this great country. We want to hear from you on what's important to be incorporated into the building program of work.

We're here to hear about two aspects. One is on more of a philosophical level: What's important about Canada today, and what would you like to see inspire us in the design of this renovation program? We're also very, very interested in and look forward to hearing your valuable contributions on the functional requirement. How does this building work for you currently? How do you see it working for you in the future? What doesn't work? What will a future parliamentarian be doing in this building, and how can we design for the next 50 years of parliamentary activities?

Essentially, it is not just the renovation of this great historic building. It also involves the addition of a new visitor welcome centre. We're looking at ways of modernizing this building and creating space for the future functions of an evolving Parliament. It's very important to have your opinions and your perspective on how it is to function here.

We look to the original design by Pearson, who really did a fantastic job on this building incorporating the past, the present and the future. It's our opportunity right now to go forward and incorporate a new layer of heritage in these new renovations.

We're here to really seek your feedback, and we will continue to engage. Our Speaker is very interested in having parliamentary engagement all the way through the project, so it's very significant for us to be here and to continue that engagement through the board to parliamentarians throughout the project.

We have been working quite a lot together on this project in terms of establishing the base requirements, but in doing so we've been doing investigative work on the existing building to inform the future project. There have been some enabling projects that are going to allow us to segregate this building and have a better understanding of the physical makeup and the historical fabric of the building.

We've put together a vision statement, and we've had engagement with the Clerk and the Speaker on that. We'll essentially share that with you and then open up for discussion.

The vision, as written today, is this.[Translation]

Centre Block is the home of the nation's federal Parliament. Our vision for the rehabilitation of Centre Block is to safeguard and honour its heritage as the epicentre of Canadian democracy; to support the work of parliamentarians; to accommodate the institution's evolving needs; to enhance the visitor experience; and to modernize the building's infrastructure.[English]

With that, we would like to open up for questions, comments and discussion.

The Chair:

Great.

I'd also like to welcome Jennifer Ditchburn, and refer people to an excellent article on Policy Options on this topic.

As you said, form follows function. We certainly hope to provide you the form that we need.

It's ironic that we're having this meeting in the reading room. It was the reading room where the fire started when the original Centre Block burned down.

I think we'll try to do one round of questions with every party, and then we'll maybe open it up to have the open format after that.

(1110)

Mr. David de Burgh Graham (Laurentides—Labelle, Lib.):

committee hansard proc 32724 words - read the full entry at permanent link - comments: 0. Posted at 22:44 on December 11, 2018

2018-12-11 TRAN 126

Standing Committee on Transport, Infrastructure and Communities

(0850)

[English]

The Chair (Hon. Judy A. Sgro (Humber River—Black Creek, Lib.)):

I call to order this meeting of the Standing Committee on Transport, Infrastructure and Communities. Pursuant to Standing Order 108(2), we are doing a study assessing the impact of aircraft noise in the vicinity of major Canadian airports.

We will go to committee business for a moment on the issue of the loss of recording from our last meeting.

Perhaps we could get everybody's attention, please.

I have spoken to Mr. Fuhr's office, and he is fine with the way the clerk has suggested that we deal with it, but I will need this motion adopted. I will read it out.

It reads: That, due to a technical error that occurred during meeting no. 124 on Tuesday, December 4, 2018, which resulted in a loss of the audio recording required to prepare the evidence, the speaking notes presented by Daniel-Robert Gooch and Glenn Priestley and the written brief submitted by Darren Buss be taken as read and included in the Evidence for that meeting and that the clerk inform the witnesses of the committee’s decision.

Is there any discussion?

Hearing none, are we agreed?

(Motion agreed to)

The Chair: Thank you.

I'm sorry?

Mr. Vance Badawey (Niagara Centre, Lib.):

[Inaudible—Editor]

The Chair:

The motion was moved by Vance and seconded by Ron.

We go on to our witnesses for our meeting today. From Air Canada, we have Murray Strom, vice-president, flight operations; and Samuel Elfassy, vice-president, safety. Welcome to both of you. Thank you very much for being here.

We are not going to wait for Mr. Wilson. He will be here with us shortly.

Captain Scott Wilson (Vice-President, Flight Operations, WestJet Airlines Ltd.):

I'm here.

The Chair:

Isn't that terrific? He just walked right through the door. Welcome, Mr. Wilson. Mr. Wilson is from WestJet Airlines.

Okay, we're going to open it up for five minutes maximum. When I raise my hand, please do your closing remarks so that the committee has sufficient time for questions.

Mr. Ron Liepert (Calgary Signal Hill, CPC):

With all due respect, you left the impression that Mr. Wilson wasn't here. He was sitting at the table all this time. I think you need to formally introduce Mr. Wilson from WestJet.

The Chair:

All right.

Scott Wilson is here. He is vice-president of flight operations with WestJet Airlines. Thank you very much, and sorry for the mix-up.

Who would like to go first for Air Canada?

Mr. Murray Strom (Vice-President, Flight Operations, Air Canada):

I'll go first.

Good morning, Madam Chair and members of the committee. My name is Murray Strom. I'm vice-president of flight operations at Air Canada.

I have overall responsibility for all aspects of safe flying operations across Air Canada's mainline fleet. I'm the airline's designated operations manager, responsible to the Minister of Transport for the management of our air operator's certificate and liaison with the international regulatory agencies with which Air Canada operates.

I'm an active Air Canada pilot and presently a triple-7 captain. I operate to all of Air Canada's international destinations.

I'm joined today by my colleague Sam Elfassy, vice-president of safety.

We are pleased to be here today to provide context to our operations and to answer any questions related to the committee's study on the impact of aircraft noise in the vicinity of major Canadian airports.

Since 2001, Air Canada has been an advocate of the balanced approach to aircraft noise management that was developed by ICAO, based in Montreal. The balanced approach is founded on four elements for noise around airports: noise reduction at source, land use management and planning, noise abatement operational procedures, and operating restrictions.

To effectively manage the impact of aircraft noise on communities takes the concerted effort of all parties involved, including airports, Nav Canada, government, and airline communities.

The biggest impact an airline can have is by reducing noise with new aircraft and technology and by supporting the development and implementation of effective noise abatement operational procedures.

Over the years, aircraft manufacturers have made significant progress to reduce aircraft noise. Aircraft today are 75% quieter than they were 50 years ago. Since 2007, Air Canada has invested more than $15 billion to modernize its fleet with new aircraft, such as the Boeing 787 Dreamliner and the Boeing 737 MAX. Supporting many jobs in the Canadian aerospace industry, these aircraft are the quietest in their respective categories. For example, the Dreamliner is more than 60% quieter than other similar airplanes from past years.

In addition to Air Canada's fleet renewal program, we've also been modernizing our A320 jets with new cavity vortex generators since 2015. Newer A320s are in the process of being retrofitted as they undergo maintenance, while older A320s are being retired.

Maintenance schedules are planned months and years in advance, and in order to consider manufacturing schedules and commercial realities, Air Canada had planned originally to retrofit all its A320 aircraft by the end of 2020. However, due to lack of available kits from Airbus, we are now operating under the following schedule: 15% of our fleet completed by the end of 2018, 50% by the end of 2019, 80% by the end of 2020, and the remainder in 2021.

Air Canada is committed to completing this program on an expedited basis. However, we are limited by maintenance schedules and the availability of the vortex kits from the manufacturer. It is important to note that while the program is under way, Air Canada is replacing A320s with quieter, more efficient 737 MAX aircraft and the Canadian-made A220s formerly known as the Bombardier C Series.

Renewing and upgrading our fleet is also reducing greenhouse gases, an important goal for Air Canada, Canadians, and the government. Once this process is complete, our fleet will be among the most fuel-efficient in the world. By the end of 2019 we will have also completed the upgrade of our flight management and guidance systems and the satellite-based navigation systems of our Airbus narrow-body fleet.

These updates will enable the aircraft to fully participate in performance-based navigation initiatives being implemented in airports across the country. This improves fuel efficiency, reduces greenhouse gases, and also reduces noise.

Air carriers operate with the highest safety standards. Our pilots must comply with the navigation and noise abatement procedures set by Nav Canada and airports at all times. We contribute to this process, informed by the balanced approach and Transport Canada's guidelines for implementation of the new and amended abatement procedures.

We also participate in the Toronto industry noise abatement board that provides the technical forum to analyze and consider the operational impact of many of the noise mitigation techniques. We also extend technical expertise to the board and support the effort, with the use of our simulators, to test the proposed approaches.

(0855)

Another important element of the balanced approach is land use planning. Appropriate land use planning policies are critical to preserve the noise reductions achieved through this $15-billion investment in new aircraft. It is important that local governments and airport authorities work together to prevent further urban encroachment around the airports.

Finally, we must recognize that demand for air travel is on the rise worldwide. In fact, IATA predicts the global passenger demand for air travel will surge from $4 billion in 2017 to over $7.8 billion in 2036. Air travel is no longer a luxury. It is for everyone. It is the middle class that is driving this growth. It is an efficient and cost-effective way to travel; connects family, business people and communities; and promotes trade and tourism. Air travel reduces travel time from days to mere hours. It builds economies. Consider that in Toronto alone, Air Canada connects Canadians to more than 220 destinations directly and that Canada has three airports among the top 50 most connected in the world.

committee hansard tran 36648 words - read the full entry at permanent link - comments: 0. Posted at 22:44 on December 11, 2018

2018-12-10 INDU 143

Standing Committee on Industry, Science and Technology

(1530)

[English]

The Chair (Mr. Dan Ruimy (Pitt Meadows—Maple Ridge, Lib.)):

Welcome, everybody.

Can you feel the excitement in the air? I'm not talking about Christmas. We should all be excited now. This is the second-to-last witness panel on copyright—

Mr. Brian Masse (Windsor West, NDP):

That you know of.

Voices: Oh, oh!

The Chair:

Don't do that.

Mr. Brian Masse:

I've been here for a while.

The Chair:

Welcome, everybody, to the Standing Committee on Industry, Science and Technology, meeting 143, as we continue our five-year statutory review of copyright.

Today we have with us Casey Chisick, a partner with Cassels Brock & Blackwell LLP; Michael Geist, Canada research chair in Internet and e-commerce law, faculty of law, University of Ottawa; Ysolde Gendreau, a full professor, faculty of law, Université de Montréal; and then, from the Intellectual Property Institute of Canada, we have Bob Tarantino, chair, copyright policy committee and Catherine Lovrics, vice-chair, copyright policy committee.

You'll each have up to seven minutes for your presentation, and I will cut you off after seven minutes because I'm like that. Then, we'll go into questions because I'm sure we have lots of questions for you.

We're going to get started with Mr. Chisick.

I want to thank you. You were here once before, and you didn't get a chance to do your thing, so thank you for coming from Toronto to see us again.

Mr. Casey Chisick (Partner, Cassels Brock & Blackwell LLP, As an Individual):

I'm happy to be here. Thank you for inviting me back.

My name is Casey Chisick. I'm a partner at Cassels Brock in Toronto. I'm certified as a specialist in copyright law and I've been practising and teaching in that area for almost 20 years. That includes many appearances before the Copyright Board and in judicial reviews of decisions of the board, including five appeals to the Supreme Court of Canada.

In my practice, I act for a wide variety of clients, including artists, copyright collectives, music publishers, universities, film and TV producers, video game developers, broadcasters, over-the-top services and many others, but the views I express here today will be mine alone.

I want to begin by thanking and congratulating the committee for its dedication to this important task. You've heard from many different stakeholders over the course of many months, and I agree with many of their views. When I was first invited to appear last month, I planned to focus on Copyright Board reform, but that train has now left the station through Bill C-86, so I'm going to comment today a bit more broadly on other aspects of the act. I will come back to the board, though, toward the end of my remarks.

On substantive matters, I'd like to touch on five specific issues.

First, it's my view that Parliament should clarify some of the many new and expanded exceptions from copyright infringement that were introduced in the 2012 amendments. Some of those have caused confusion and have led to unnecessary litigation and unintended consequences.

For example, a 2016 decision of the Copyright Board found that backup copies of music made by commercial radio stations accounted for more than 22% of the commercial value of all of the copies that radio stations make. As a result of the expansion of the backup copies exception, the Copyright Board then proceeded to discount the stations' royalty payments by an equivalent percentage of over 22%. It took that money directly out of the pockets of creators and rights holders, even though the copies were found in that case to have very significant economic value.

In my view, that can't be the kind of balance that Parliament intended when it introduced that exception in 2012.

Second, the act should be amended to ensure that statutory safe harbours for Internet intermediaries work as intended. They need to be available only to truly passive entities, not to sites or services that play more active roles in facilitating access to infringing content. I agree that intermediaries who do nothing more than offer the means of communication or storage should not be liable for copyright infringement, but too many services that are not passive, including certain cloud services and content aggregators, are resisting payment by claiming that they fall within the same exceptions. To the extent that it's a loophole in the act, it should be closed.

Third, it's important to clarify ownership of copyright in movies and television shows, mostly because the term of copyright in those works is so uncertain under the current approach, but I disagree with the suggestion that screenwriters or directors ought to be recognized as the authors. I haven't heard any persuasive explanation from their representatives as to why that should be the case or, more importantly, what they would do with the rights they're seeking if those rights were to be granted.

In my view, given the commercial realities of the industry, which has dealt with this for years under collective agreements, a better solution would be to deem the producer to be the author, or at least the first owner of copyright, and deal with the term of copyright accordingly.

Fourth, Parliament should reconsider the reversion provisions of the Copyright Act. Currently, assignments and exclusive licences terminate automatically 25 years after an author's death, with copyright then reverting to the author's estate. That was once standard in many countries, but it's now more or less unique to Canada, and it can be quite disruptive in practice.

Imagine spending millions of dollars turning a book into a movie or building a business around a logo commissioned from a graphic designer only to wake up one day and find that you no longer have the right to use that underlying material in Canada. There are better and more effective ways to protect the interests of creators, many of whom I represent, without turning legitimate businesses upside down overnight.

(1535)

Fifth, the act should provide a clear and efficient path to site blocking and website de-indexing orders on a no-fault basis to Internet intermediaries and with an appropriate eye on balance among the competing interests of the various stakeholders. Although the Supreme Court has made clear that these injunctions may be available under equitable principles, the path to obtaining them is, in my view, far too long and expensive to be helpful to most rights holders. Canada should follow the lead of many of its major trading partners, including the U.K. and Australia, by adopting a more streamlined process—one that keeps a careful eye on the balance of competing interests among the various stakeholders.

In my remaining time, I'd like to address the recent initiatives to reform the operations of the Copyright Board.

The board is vital to the creative economy. Rights holders, users and the general public all rely on it to set fair and equitable rates for the uses of protected material. For the Canadian creative market to function effectively, the board needs to do its work and render its decisions in a timely, efficient and predictable way.

I was glad to see the comprehensive reforms in Bill C-86. I'm also mindful that the bill is well on its way to becoming law, so what I say here today may not have much immediate impact. For that reason, and in the interest of time, I'll just refer you to the testimony I gave before the Senate banking committee on November 21. I'll then touch on two specific issues.

First, the introduction of mandatory rate-setting criteria, including both the public interest and what a willing buyer would pay to a willing seller, is a very positive development. Clear and explicit criteria should result in a more timely, efficient and predictable tariff process. That's important because unpredictable rates can lead to severe market disruption, especially in emerging markets, like online music.

I'm concerned that the benefits of the provision in Bill C-86 will be undermined by its language, which also empowers the board to consider “any other criterion” it deems appropriate. An open-ended approach like this will create more mandatory boxes for the parties to check, in addition to things like technological neutrality and balance, which the Supreme Court introduced in 2015, but it won't guarantee that the board won't simply discard the parties' evidence in favour of other, totally unpredictable factors. That could increase the cost of board proceedings, with no corresponding increase in efficiency or predictability.

If it's too late to delete that provision from Bill C-86, I suggest that the government move quickly to provide regulatory guidance as to how the criteria should be applied, including what to look for in the willing buyer, willing seller analysis.

Last, very briefly, I understand that some committee witnesses have suggested that rather than doing it voluntarily, as the act currently provides, collectives should be required to file their licensing agreements with the Copyright Board. I agree that having access to all relevant agreements could help the board develop a more complete portrait of the markets it regulates. That's a laudable goal.

However, there's also an important counterweight to consider: Users may be reluctant to enter into agreements with collectives if they know they're going to be filed with the Copyright Board and thus become a matter of public record. The concern would be, of course, that services in the marketplace are operating in a very competitive environment. The last thing they want to do is make the terms of their confidential agreements known to everyone, including their competitors. I can say more about this in the question and answer session to follow.

Thank you for your attention. I do look forward to your questions.

(1540)

The Chair:

Thank you very much.

We're going to move to Michael Geist.

You have seven minutes, please, sir.

Dr. Michael Geist (Canada Research Chair in Internet and E-Commerce Law, Faculty of Law, University of Ottawa, As an Individual):

Thank you.

Good afternoon. My name is Michael Geist. I am a law professor at the University of Ottawa, where I hold the Canada research chair in Internet and e-commerce law and where I am a member of the Centre for Law, Technology and Society. I appear today in a personal capacity as an independent academic, representing only my own views.

I have been closely following the committee's work, and I have much to say about copyright reform in Canada. Given the limited time, however, I'd like to quickly highlight five issues: educational copying, site blocking, the so-called value gap, the impact of the copyright provisions in the CUSMA, and potential reforms in support of Canada's innovation strategy. My written submission to the committee includes links to dozens of articles I have written on these issues.

committee foss hansard indu 40788 words - read the full entry at permanent link - comments: 0. Posted at 22:44 on December 10, 2018

2018-12-07 12:01 House intervention / intervention en chambre

Impaired driving, Oral questions,

Conduite avec facultés affaiblies, Questions orales,

Madam Speaker, this week, during National Safe Driving Week and in the Operation Red Nose season, the Conservatives are saying that there is nothing wrong with having a few beers and some chicken wings before getting behind the wheel of a car.

As the Christmas season is upon us, can the Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Public Safety inform the House of the measures our government is taking to prevent impaired driving?

Madame la Présidente, cette semaine, durant la Semaine nationale de la sécurité routière et pendant la saison d'Opération Nez rouge, les conservateurs affirment qu'il n'y a rien de mal à consommer quelques bières en mangeant des ailes de poulet avant de prendre le volant.

Alors que le temps des Fêtes est à nos portes, la secrétaire parlementaire du ministre de la Sécurité publique peut-elle informer la Chambre des mesures que prend notre gouvernement pour prévenir la conduite avec les facultés affaiblies?

Watch | Hansard

Ecoutez | Hansard

hansard parlchmbr qp tv 173 words - read the full entry at permanent link - comments: 0. Posted at 20:26 on December 07, 2018

2018-12-06 TRAN 125

Standing Committee on Transport, Infrastructure and Communities

(0845)

[English]

The Chair (Hon. Judy A. Sgro (Humber River—Black Creek, Lib.)):

I'm calling to order meeting 125 of the Standing Committee on Transport, Infrastructure and Communities. Pursuant to Standing Order 108(2), we are continuing a study of the mandate of the Minister of Infrastructure and Communities.

With us today we have the Honourable François-Philippe Champagne, Minister of Infrastructure and Communities, and from the Office of Infrastructure Canada, Kelly Gillis, Deputy Minister, Infrastructure and Communities. Welcome to you both. We've been waiting anxiously for your appearance, so thank you for coming today.

Minister Champagne, I'll turn it over to you.

Mr. Matt Jeneroux (Edmonton Riverbend, CPC):

Madam Chair, sorry, just as a bit of housekeeping before we get to the minister's much anticipated comments, I'm hoping he'll address in his opening remarks that he wasn't here for the estimates. I know he's here on his mandate letter today, but I just want to make sure we've flagged the fact that most of the time, ministers come for their supplementary estimates as well.

Thank you.

The Chair:

Thank you, Mr. Jeneroux.

Minister Champagne, you have five minutes, please.

Hon. François-Philippe Champagne (Minister of Infrastructure and Communities):

Thank you, Madam Chair.

It's a real pleasure to be in front of you and your colleagues today.

It's my first appearance at this committee, but as a start, I am very delighted to be with all of you and to talk about progress in infrastructure. I think, Madam Chair, that infrastructure touches the lives of Canadians in every community, whether urban or rural.

Good morning and thank you for inviting me, members of the committee.

I'm joined by Kelly Gillis, my very able deputy minister, who has been very active on this file to deliver for Canadians.

I'd like to start by acknowledging the outstanding work of my predecessor, Minister Sohi. Minister Sohi was responsible for this file, and we all know he's truly passionate about infrastructure, almost as much as he is about his hometown of Edmonton. He left a good legacy in the projects and the program. He's been a strong voice for his region, and obviously the province of Alberta, and continues to be in his new portfolio as Minister of Natural Resources.[Translation]

I would also like to thank my Deputy Minister, and the whole department of Infrastructure Canada for their hard work and dedication over the past three years. Thanks to their continued efforts, we have made enormous progress in delivering modern infrastructure to Canadians everywhere in the country.[English]

Let me give a brief overview. Since I was appointed Minister of Infrastructure and Communities, I was fortunate enough to see first-hand our investments in infrastructure across the country. I recently attended the groundbreaking for the Port Lands flood protection project in Toronto, which will help transform the Port Lands into beautiful new communities that will be surrounded by parks and green spaces. It will also add affordable housing to the Toronto region.

I also visited the Inuvik wind generation project in the Northwest Territories, which will provide an efficient, reliable and clean source of energy for Inuvik residents. I was pleased that this was the first project under the Arctic energy fund, which is helping to move communities in the north from diesel to renewable energy.

(0850)

[Translation]

I also visited an underground garage in Montreal that will increase the city's fleet of metro cars, improve the frequency of service, and, of course, support the anticipated growth in ridership on Montreal's public transit.[English]

Let me briefly touch on a few successes that we've had so far. Our plan of investing $180 billion over the next decade in infrastructure across the country is truly historic. I am proud of the progress we have made so far and the positive impact it has made on people across the country. The plan is being delivered by 14 federal departments and agencies.[Translation]

All 70 new programs and initiatives are now launched and more than 32,000 infrastructure projects have already been approved. Nearly all are underway.[English]

Since Minister Sohi's last appearance at this committee in May, I am pleased to note some of the significant milestones we have achieved together. The first one, which I'm very proud of, is the smart cities challenge. Finalists were announced this summer, and the winners will be announced in late spring 2019.[Translation]

The Canada Infrastructure Bank announced its first investment, which is $1.28 billion in the Réseau express métropolitain in Montreal. With this investment, the bank does exactly what it was intended to do: free up grant funding so that we can build more infrastructure for Canadians.[English]

Despite the fact that very little was done to advance this important project when we formed government, the Gordie Howe international bridge is now finally under way. That is truly historic for Canada. We know the Windsor-Detroit corridor has about 30% of all merchandise trade between Canada and the United States. This project is truly building on our current and future prosperity.[Translation]

Infrastructure Canada has also signed bilateral agreements with all of the provinces and territories for the next decade. We have already approved funding under these new guidelines for[English]the Green Line in Calgary, the Millennium Line extension in British Columbia, [Translation]

and Azur subway trains for Montreal,[English]and the water treatment system in the Comox Valley Regional District in British Columbia.

Lastly, we also launched the disaster mitigation and adaptation fund. We've already received a number of applications for funding and are currently reviewing them.

I also had the pleasure to meet with my provincial and territorial counterparts in September. One key item we discussed was how to better match the flow of our funding and our processes with the construction season in the sense that we want to make our intake, review and approval process faster and better, and make sure that our processes, whether federal, provincial or territorial, are in line with the construction season. I have impressed on my colleagues that we need to work diligently on that.

I visited several projects where work is well under way, but the claims for reimbursements have not been submitted, for example the Cherry Street water and lake-filling project in Toronto and the Côte-Vertu garage in Montreal, Quebec. To address this issue, we recently launched a pilot project with Saskatchewan, Nova Scotia and Alberta to test the effectiveness of a progressive billing approach. We know that Canadians want to see funds that match milestones in projects, a “percentage of completion” type of approach, and we have asked our colleagues in the provinces to work with us to achieve that outcome as well.[Translation]

In closing, I would like to thank the committee members for giving me this opportunity to update you. I hope that together, with each member of the committee, we will be able to build 21st-century infrastructures, modern, durable and green, for all Canadians.

Thank you.

(0855)

[English]

The Chair:

Thank you very much, Minister Champagne. We appreciate all of your comments, and the fact that you kept them to five minutes so that the committee can ask the umpteen questions they have for you.

Mr. Jeneroux.

Mr. Matt Jeneroux:

Thank you, Madam Chair, and thank you, Minister, for being here today.

Have you heard from stakeholders, who I know you meet with frequently, about the social impacts of male construction workers, specifically in rural areas?

Hon. François-Philippe Champagne:

One group of people I meet most often is construction workers. They are the true heroes of what we're doing. I was just recently on the Champlain Bridge in Montreal. I can say to my colleague that when I met the 1,600 workers who are working seven days a week, day and night, in good and bad weather, I really listened to them. I always made sure to repeat to them that my first priority on every construction site is the health and safety of the people and the benefits to the community in which they work.

Mr. Matt Jeneroux:

I know you know this, Minister, but Montreal is not a rural area. My specific question was about rural areas. The Prime Minister recently made a statement that there are negative social impacts of men, specifically construction workers, in rural areas. I'm wondering if you've heard the same thing.

Hon. François-Philippe Champagne:

The member is right. I was referring to an urban project, but since we have more than 4,000 projects across the country, he would appreciate that I do that not only in urban areas, but also in rural areas. I always engage with workers, making sure I understand about their health and safety and the benefits to the community in which they operate. I was recently with the member at the Fort Edmonton Park extension, and we met with workers and people who are going to be doing the work there, and everywhere they are—

Mr. Matt Jeneroux:

Again, Minister, Edmonton is not a rural area. I'm speaking specifically about rural areas and the Prime Minister's comments. Yes or no, do you agree with the Prime Minister's comments?

Hon. François-Philippe Champagne:

committee hansard tran 31486 words - read the full entry at permanent link - comments: 0. Posted at 22:44 on December 06, 2018

2018-12-05 INDU 142

Standing Committee on Industry, Science and Technology

(1620)

[English]

The Chair (Mr. Dan Ruimy (Pitt Meadows—Maple Ridge, Lib.)):

Welcome, everybody. We're going to get started, because we are almost an hour behind—which happens in the House.

Welcome, everybody, as we continue our five-year statutory review of the Copyright Act.

Today we have with us, from the Copyright Board, Nathalie Théberge, vice-chair and chief executive officer; Gilles McDougall, secretary general; and Sylvain Audet, general counsel.

From the Department of Canadian Heritage, we have Kahlil Cappuccino, director of copyright policy in the creative marketplace and innovation branch. We also have Pierre-Marc Lauzon, policy analyst, copyright policy, creative marketplace and innovation branch.

And finally, from the Department of Industry, we have Mark Schaan, director general, marketplace framework policy branch; and Martin Simard, director, copyright and trademark policy directorate.

As we discussed on Monday, the witnesses will have their regular seven-minute introduction. We do have a second panel, so each party will get that initial seven minutes of questions and then we'll suspend. We'll bring in the second round, and we'll do the same thing all over again. We'll finish when we finish, so that will be good.

We're going to get started right away with the Copyright Board.

Ms. Théberge, go ahead. [Translation]

You have seven minutes.

Ms. Nathalie Théberge (Vice-Chair and Chief Executive Officer, Copyright Board):

Mr. Chair and distinguished members of this committee, thank you.

My name is Nathalie Théberge. I am the new vice-chair and CEO of the Copyright Board, as of October. I will be speaking today as CEO.

As you said, Gilles McDougall, secretary general, and Sylvain Audet, general counsel, both from the board, are with me today. I would like to thank the committee for giving us the opportunity to speak on the parliamentary review of the Copyright Act.

First, I'd like to provide a reminder: The Copyright Board of Canada is an independent, quasi-judicial tribunal created under the Copyright Act. The board's role is to establish the royalties to be paid for the use of works and other subject matters protected by copyright, when the administration of these rights is entrusted to a collective society. The direct value of royalties set by the board's decisions is estimated to almost $500 million annually.

The board sits at the higher end of the independent spectrum for administrative tribunals. Its mandate is to set fair and equitable tariffs in an unbiased, impartial and unimpeded fashion. This is not an easy task, especially as information required to support the work of the board is not easily acquired. The board is on the onset of a major reform following the introduction of changes to the Copyright Act imbedded in the Budget Implementation Act, Bill C-86.

If I may, I would like to state how committed the board is towards implementing the reform proposals. Of course, the impact of these proposals will take some time to assess as there will be a transition period during which all players involved, including the board and the parties that appear before it, will need to adapt and change their practices, behaviours and, to some extent, their organizational culture.

This transition period is to be expected due to the ambitious scope of the reform proposals, but we believe that the entire Canadian intellectual property ecosystem will benefit from a more efficient pricing system under the guidance of the Copyright Board.

However, reforming the board is not a panacea for all woes affecting the ability for creators to get fairly compensated for their work and for users to have access to these works. As such, the board welcomes the opportunity to put forward a few pistes de réflexion to the committee, hoping its experience in the actual operationalization of many provisions of the Copyright Act may be useful.

Today, we would like to suggest three themes the committee may want to consider. We were very careful as to choose only issues of direct implication for the board's mandate and operations, as defined in the Copyright Act and amended through the Budget Implementation Act 2018, No. 2, currently under review by Parliament.

(1625)

[English]

The first theme relates to transparency. Committee members who are familiar with the board know that our ability to render decisions that are fair and equitable and that reflect the public interest depends on our ability to understand and consider the broader marketplace. For that, you need information, including on whether other agreements covering similar uses of copyrighted material exist in a given market. This is a little bit like real estate, where to properly establish the selling price of a property you need to consider comparables, namely, the value of similar properties in the same neighbourhood, the rate of the market, etc.

Currently, filing of agreements with the board is not mandatory, which often leaves the board having to rely on an incomplete portrait of the market. We believe that the Copyright Act should provide a meaningful incentive for parties to file agreements between collectives and users. Some may argue that the board already has the authority to request from parties that they provide the board with relevant agreements. We think that legislative guidance would avoid the board having to exert pressure via subpoena to gain access to those agreements, which in turn can contribute to delays that we all want to avoid.

More broadly, we encourage the committee to consider in its report how to increase the overall transparency within the copyright ecosystem in Canada. As part of the reform, we will do our part at the board by adding to our own processes steps and practices that incentivize better sharing of information among parties and facilitate the participation of the public.

The second theme relates to access. We encourage the committee to include in its report a recommendation for a complete scrub of the act, since the last time it was done was in 1985. Successive reforms and modifications have resulted in a legislative text that is not only hard to understand but that at times appears to bear some incoherencies. In a world where creators increasingly have to manage their rights themselves, it is important that our legislative tools be written in a manner that facilitates comprehension. As such, we offer as an inspiration the Australian copyright act.

We further encourage the committee to consider modifying the publication requirements in the orphan works regime. Currently, where the owner of copyright cannot be located, the board cannot issue licences in relation to certain works, such as works that are solely available online or deposited in a museum. We believe the act should be amended to permit the board to issue a licence in those cases, with safeguards.

Finally, our third theme relates to efficiency. The board reform as proposed in Bill C-86 would go a long way in making the tariff-setting process in Canada more efficient and predictable and ultimately a better use of public resources. I believe the committee has heard the same message from various experts.

We recommend two other possible means to achieve these objectives.

First, we encourage the committee to consider changing the act to grant the board the power to issue interim decisions on its motion. Currently, the board can only do so on application from a party. This power would provide the board with an additional tool to influence the pace and dynamics of tariff-setting proceedings.

(1630)

[Translation]

Second, we encourage the committee to explore whether the act should be modified to clarify the binding nature of board tariffs and licences. This proposal follows a relatively recent decision of the Supreme Court of Canada where the court made a statement to the effect that when the board sets royalties within licences in individual cases—the arbitration regime—such licences did not have a mandatory binding effect against users in certain circumstances. Some commentators have also expressed different views on how that statement would be applicable to the tariff context before the board.

We are aware that this is a controversial issue, but would still invite you to study it if only because parties and the board spend time, efforts and resources in seeking a decision from the board.

On that happy note, we congratulate each member of the committee for the work accomplished thus far, and thank you for your attention.

The Chair:

Thank you.[English]

We're going to move directly to the Department of Canadian Heritage.

Mr. Cappuccino, you have up to seven minutes.

Mr. Kahlil Cappuccino (Director, Copyright Policy, Creative Marketplace and Innovation Branch, Department of Canadian Heritage):

It's actually Mark Schaan who will start.

The Chair:

Okay. We're going to go to the Department of Industry.

Mr. Schaan, you have up to seven minutes. [Translation]

Mr. Mark Schaan (Director General, Marketplace Framework Policy Branch, Department of Industry):

The Department of Innovation, Science and Economic Development Canada will share the time available with the Department of Canadian Heritage.

Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.

Good afternoon, distinguished members of the committee.

It is a pleasure for me to be before you again to discuss copyright. My name is Mark Schaan. I am the director general of the Marketplace Framework Policy Branch at Innovation, Science and Economic Development Canada.

I am accompanied by Martin Simard, who is the director of the Copyright and Trademarks Policy Directorate in my branch.

We are here with our Canadian Heritage colleagues, Kahlil Cappuccino and Pierre-Marc Lauzon, to update the committee on two recent developments that relate to your review of the Copyright Act.

committee hansard indu 25596 words - read the full entry at permanent link - comments: 0. Posted at 22:44 on December 05, 2018

2018-12-04 PROC 136

Standing Committee on Procedure and House Affairs

(1105)

[English]

The Chair (Hon. Larry Bagnell (Yukon, Lib.)):

Good morning. Welcome to the 136th meeting of the Standing Committee on Procedure and House Affairs. Today we continue our consideration of the 4th report of the Subcommittee on Private Members' Business, wherein the subcommittee recommended that Bill C-421 be designated non-votable.

We are pleased to be joined by Philippe Dufresne, the House's law clerk and parliamentary counsel.

Thank you for being here today. It's great to have you back again and to have your wise counsel. We look forward to your opening remarks—or your remarks. That's the only reason we're here.

Mr. Philippe Dufresne (Law Clerk and Parliamentary Counsel, House of Commons):

Thank you very much, Mr. Chair and members of the committee.

I'm pleased to be here with you today to assist the committee in its work as it considers the votability of Bill C-421. On November 29, 2018, the committee commenced consideration of matters related to private members' business regarding Bill C-421. The committee heard representations from Mr. Mario Beaulieu, the member of Parliament for La Pointe-de-l'Île and sponsor of the bill, and Mr. Marc-André Roche, researcher for the Bloc Québécois.

I understand that the conversation was focused on whether Bill C-421 complies with the Charter of Rights and Freedoms, and following that meeting the committee decided to invite me to appear to discuss some of the legal issues raised.

My remarks today will be focusing on the following topics. I will address the charter questions and the drafting of private members' bills. I will note the confidentiality of the private members' drafting process in my office. I will speak to the non-votability criterion adopted by this committee specifically, and the requirement that the bill does not clearly violate the Constitution. I will discuss some recent case law of the Federal Court of Appeal that may be helpful in identifying the parameters of this criterion. I will, of course, be happy to respond to any questions that the committee members may have about the specific constitutional issues that have been raised to date. [Translation]

The legislative counsel working for my office are responsible for drafting bills for members who are not part of the government. In my opinion, this is an essential service for parliamentary democracy. We are committed to this mandate and we fulfill it with a great deal of enthusiasm. I am extremely proud of the dedicated team who does this work in a professional and impartial manner.

In addition to drafting the bill properly, the legislative counsel assigned to the bill advises the member if they believe that it raises issues related to the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms or to the Constitution of Canada. Depending on the nature of the issue, the counsel may suggest that the member contact the Library of Parliament to obtain further information or they will draft a formal legal opinion for the member. Those exchanges about the bill are confidential and cannot be divulged without the member's consent.

Constitutional issues may be resolved in various ways. For example, the counsel may discuss with the member and suggest an approach to mitigate the risks of violating the charter. The counsel may also suggest drafting a national strategy if the matter in question is rather under provincial jurisdiction, or if the member proceeds by way of a motion instead of a bill. Regardless of any concerns raised, the final decision to proceed with the bill rests with the member.

Confidentiality is extremely important to us. It is mentioned in the 34th report of the Standing Committee on Procedure and House Affairs dated March 16, 2000, in which the committee noted that the work of legislative counsel is covered by parliamentary privilege, which has an even higher legal basis, as it is provided for in our Constitution. The committee quoted the Speaker from March 13, 2000, who stated: All staff of the House of Commons working in support of Members in their legislative function are governed by strict confidentiality with regard to persons outside their operational field and, of course, vis-à-vis other Members. [English]

This is fundamental. When we serve you as legislators in providing the legislative drafting services, we do so with strict confidentiality. I will not be discussing today any conversations or advice that could have been given to any member on any specific topic. I am available and here to address the issues generally before you, and specifically, to talk about the criteria around non-votability.[Translation]

As you know, a bill that is added to the order of precedence will be reviewed by the Subcommittee on Private Members' Business to determine its votability. An analyst from the Library of Parliament is assigned to assist the subcommittee when considerations relating to votability are raised. The analyst can provide information and analysis on the issue but cannot provide a legal opinion. The votability criteria are established by the Standing Committee on Procedure and House Affairs. In the most recent version of the criteria established in May 2007, the four criteria are as follows: Bills and motions must not concern questions that are outside federal jurisdiction; Bills and motions must not clearly violate the Constitution Acts, 1867 to 1982, including the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms;

We are most interested in that last criterion. Bills and motions must not concern questions that are substantially the same as ones already voted on by the House of Commons in the current session of Parliament, or as ones preceding them in the order of precedence; Bills and motions must not concern questions that are currently on the Order Paper or Notice Paper as items of government business.

(1110)

[English]

Bills that fail to meet the criterion, with a clear violation of the Constitution Act, will be found to be non-votable.

To determine if a bill is non-votable, the question is not whether any given bills, or in this case Bill C-421 could violate the charter, but rather whether the bill clearly violates the charter, which is a higher standard for intervention. It is one that is more favourable to allowing debates about bills in the House. The process is internal to the House of Commons. As I've stated, it was set out and the criterion was adopted by this committee.

However, a useful comparison can be made to the standard applied by the Minister of Justice for the review of government bills for charter compliance pursuant to section 4.1 of the Department of Justice Act. This section requires the minister to “ascertain whether any of the provisions” of a government bill “are inconsistent with the purposes and provisions of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms”. It requires the minister to report any such inconsistency to the House.

In a recent decision, Schmidt v. Canada, the Federal Court of Appeal had to determine the interpretation of this criterion of ascertaining whether it's inconsistent. There were two possibilities: Are you going to ask whether it's likely in violation of the charter, or are you going to ask for a higher threshold?

In the decision written by Justice Stratas for the Federal Court of Appeal, the court found that the appropriate standard obliges the Minister of Justice to report when there is no credible argument supporting the constitutionality of a proposed bill, and not when the proposed bill or regulation may likely be unconstitutional.

The court held that, given the uncertain difficult jurisprudential terrain of constitutional law and the time when the minister is expected to assess proposed legislation, the only responsible reliable report that could be given under the examination provisions is when proposed legislation is so constitutionally deficient it cannot be credibly defended. In other words, the court affirmed that the Minister of Justice only needs to inform the House of inconsistency between a government bill and the charter when no credible argument can be made in support of the measure. The court added that this approach was justified, given the inherent difficulty in predicting the outcome of constitutional law cases before the courts.

The court gave a number of examples. The case law can evolve, the Supreme Court itself can change its previous findings, and a lot of the charter cases will be dependent on the facts that will be led in justification of any violation. It's difficult to predict, and that supported a strict standard. The court also noted that it made sense for the standard applied by the minister to be commensurate to the standard applied by this committee in determining votability.

Leave to appeal has been sought, in this decision, to the Supreme Court of Canada. It may not be the last word on this point, but it is to date, at this time, the last word on the interpretation. As a result, in a similar way, the committee examines proposed legislation to determine whether it clearly violates the charter, not whether it could violate the charter.

In my view, if we apply this standard, if you apply it, a bill would only be deemed non-votable in situations where no credible argument could be made in support of the bill's constitutionality. That is, in my view, a helpful standard because it helps to deal with uncertainties.

Justice Stratas talked about this in his decision, saying that there will be rare cases where it's so obvious and so clear that you can make this determination, but in others the standard will not be met. That's the question before this committee, and I will be happy to assist as best I can in answering any questions you may have. I know there were some specific charter issues that were discussed in the previous hearings, and I'm happy to address those.[Translation]

Thank you. [English]

The Chair:

I'm just going to go informally and let people ask questions.

I just want to ask two things quickly, though. You talk about helping members of Parliament. Roughly how many people are you?

Mr. Philippe Dufresne:

The total in my office is 36. We have two main mandates. One is legal advice to the House itself, and one is the legislative drafting. The legislative drafting would be about half of my office, including the publication of bills.

(1115)

The Chair:

When you talk about the justice minister's requirement to see if a bill's content doesn't offend the Charter of Rights and Freedoms, they do not do that analysis of private members' bills in advance, do they?

Mr. Philippe Dufresne:

They do not. They do that for government bills.

The Chair:

Right.

Mr. Graham.

Mr. David de Burgh Graham (Laurentides—Labelle, Lib.):

Mr. Dufresne, for clarity, the charter provides that Canadians can communicate with the government in either language. Is that correct?

Mr. Philippe Dufresne:

Yes.

Mr. David de Burgh Graham:

Bill C-421 specifies that an applicant for citizenship in Quebec must demonstrate a knowledge of French. The only question for me is this: Is demonstrating a knowledge of a language to the government communicating with the government? If it is, then I don't see a credible argument to make this constitutional. I want to hear your thoughts on that.

Mr. Philippe Dufresne:

committee hansard proc 27292 words - read the full entry at permanent link - comments: 0. Posted at 22:44 on December 04, 2018

2018-12-04 TRAN 124

Standing Committee on Transport, Infrastructure and Communities

(0850)

[English]

The Chair (Hon. Judy A. Sgro (Humber River—Black Creek, Lib.)):

I'm calling to order this meeting of the Standing Committee on Transport, Infrastructure and Communities.

Pursuant to the order of reference of Wednesday, November 28, 2018, we are doing a study of challenges facing flight schools in Canada.

With us as witnesses today, from the Air Transport Association of Canada, we have Darren Buss, the vice-president.

From the Canadian Airports Council, we have Daniel-Robert Gooch, president.

And from the Northern Air Transport Association, we have Glenn Priestley, the executive director.

Welcome to all of you.

Good morning to committee members. Thank you all for being here on time this morning.

We'll turn it over to whoever would like to begin.

Mr. Buss from the Air Transport Association of Canada, would you like to begin? You have five minutes. Go ahead, please.

Mr. Darren Buss (Vice-President, Air Transport Association of Canada):

Thank you very much.

Good morning, and thank you very much for the opportunity to be here today to discuss the challenges faced by Canadian flight schools in meeting the needs of the Canadian aviation industry.

As you know, I'm here representing the Air Transport Association of Canada, or ATAC for short. Since 1934, ATAC has been the national association for commercial aviation in Canada. We're the voice of almost 200 member companies engaged in all kinds of commercial aviation all across Canada. That includes 50 flight training organizations that, together, deliver about 80% of all commercial pilot licences issued in Canada.

The recommendations I have [Technical difficulty 8:49:46 - 9:36:48—witnesses' briefs taken as read—Editor]

Overview

ATAC welcomes this opportunity to present recommendations to the House of Commons’ Standing Committee on Transport, Infrastructure and Communities. The recommendations presented here fall into four broad categories:

1) Support student pilots

2) Support flight schools

3) Support research

4) Support outreach

This document also contains background information on topics such becoming a pilot, and the typical pilot career path.

About ATAC

Founded in 1934, the Air Transport Association of Canada (ATAC) serves as Canada's national trade association for commercial aviation and flight training industries, as well as aviation industry suppliers. Our membership is comprised of about 200 companies engaged in commercial aviation all across the country, including 50 flight training schools that together deliver approximately 80% of all commercial pilot licenses issued in Canada.

Representing ATAC on flight training and labour market issues, including the current pilot shortage, is Darren Buss. Darren has an airline transport pilot license and 13 years experience as a professional pilot. He holds the title of Vice President at ATAC, and also sits on the board of directors at the Canadian Council for Aviation and Aerospace (CCAA). Since graduating from the Aviation and Flight Technology program at Seneca College in 2005 he has flown for air operators in Alberta, Manitoba, Saskatchewan, and Ontario, steadily gaining responsibilities as a pilot, training pilot, and manager. Darren holds a Bachelor of Science degree in Mathematical Science (specializing in Computer Science) from McMaster University, where he also studied Materials Engineering, and previously worked as a software developer.

Recommendations

1. Implement Government Backed Student Loans for Flight Training [Support Students]: Lack of financing is the most often cited reason why people discontinue flight training or choose not to pursue it at all. Making financing available would bring more people into aviation, and also give policy-makers a tool to incentivize people into jobs where they are most needed, such as flight instruction and medevac. A similar incentive program already exists for medical personnel working in remote areas.

ATAC is consulting with commercial banks to create a student loan product for pilots. It is clear that banks are not willing to do this unless the loans are backed by government. Fortunately, a relatively small investment by government would result in a nation-wide student loan program for pilots that could then be used to incentivise pilots into jobs where they are desperately needed. ATAC estimates that less than $5 million per year, over a 10-year program, would be sufficient to do this. This is based on the following:

• 600 commercial pilots trained annually (domestic only)

• Worst case, all those pilots borrow the full cost of training ($75,000)

• 600 pilots/year x $75,000/pilot = $45 million/year borrowed from bank

• Modelled loan default rate is 10%, therefore approximately $4.5 million/year goes to default

2. Approve the Proposal to extend SWILP to Pilot Training [Support Students]: Student Work Integrated Learning (SWILP) is an excellent skill development program that has helped thousands of students acquire work-related skills. A proposal has been made to extend the applicability of this program to include pilots wishing to become flight instructors or floatplane pilots. This would increase the number of available flight instructors and therefore Canada’s capacity to train more pilots. This proposal has received wide praise from both industry and government, but it has not yet been implemented.

3. Help Flight Schools Invest in New Technology and Infrastructure [Support Flight Schools]: The typical Canadian flight school operates aircraft that are older than the pilots who fly them. Newer aircraft are often quieter and more fuel-efficient than older aircraft. They are also more similar to the modern transport aircraft that student pilots will be expected to operate when they join the workforce, which makes them more effective trainers. Simulators are another game-changing technology that is in short supply at most flight schools due to the fact their cost is similar to a new aircraft.

New single-engine training aircraft typically cost around $400,000 USD. Multi-engine trainers typically start around $700,000 USD. Certified flight training devices (FTDs), commonly called simulators, start at about $300,000 USD for a single-engine aircraft and go up to several million for larger aircraft. Ideally, flight schools operate 7 single-engine aircraft for every multi-engine aircraft, and as many simulators as they can afford and have the space for. These are huge capital expenses for small businesses that operate on very tight margins.

A government program of matching spending on eligible purchases including aircraft, simulators, and facilities expansion (for simulators) would almost immediately increase capacity to train new pilots by enabling flight schools to make these critical investments. Giving preference to aircraft manufactured in Canada would also stimulate aerospace manufacturing in Canada. For example, the government program could offer $1 for every $1 spent by a flight school on aircraft and simulators built outside of Canada, and $1.20 for every $1 spent on products manufactured in Canada.

As a rule of thumb, every aircraft added to a flight school’s fleet allows that school to train an additional 7 pilots per year.

4. Establish Approved Training Organizations (ATO) [Support Students & Flight Schools]: The Canadian Aviation Regulations (CARs) are the regulatory foundation for all aviation activities in Canada. They have remained largely unchanged since they were introduced in 1996. Since then, many things have changed, including advancements in simulator technology and a shift towards evidence and competency-based training techniques. The wording of the CARs, rooted in the thinking of the early 1990’s, effectively prevents these advances from being used in ab-initio flight training only because they were not envisioned CARs were written. The CARAC process for changing the CARs is slow and difficult, but there is another way.

Aviation Training Organizations (ATO) is a framework used in other jurisdictions around the world that allows flight schools to demonstrate compliance with the desired result of the regulations using a different means of achieving it. For example, if the regulations state that an applicant for a private pilot license shall have completed a minimum of 45 hours of flight training, including a maximum of 5 hours in an approved simulator, an ATO might demonstrate that completing 20 of the 45 hours in an approved simulator produces pilots that are at least as competent. Using this approved syllabus, the ATO can conduct training that produces better pilots, less noise and less pollution, often at lower cost. ATO trained pilots must meet the same standards and pass the same assessments as their non-ATO counterparts. ATO may also open the door to using evidence and competency-based techniques in ab-initio training, which would further improve efficiency.

ATAC has been working with Transport Canada on an ATO framework for several years. Every year we hear that it is close to being ready. ATAC believes it would be in the best interest of the general public as well as pilots and the aviation industry for a carefully designed ATO framework to be approved as soon as possible.

5. Support Research Activities [Support Research]: Good data drives good decisions. Rigorous study of what prevents people, particularly those from underrepresented groups such as women and indigenous people, from choosing careers in aviation would be helpful in making decisions on the best way to allocate funding.

ATAC recommends that the government allocate resources, either internally or through an organization such as the Canadian Council for Aviation and Aerospace (CCAA), to complete such a study.

6. Support Outreach Activities [Support Outreach]: Any long-term solution to the current labour market shortage must include outreach to people not currently involved in the aviation industry. This includes youth, workers from other industries displaced by layoffs or wishing to change career, and people outside of Canada who may wish to immigrate.

ATAC recommends that the government make funding available to associations, such as ATAC, who are in a position to organize outreach events across Canada and internationally.

Aviation Labour Shortage

Canada faces a critical shortage of pilots and demand is expected to grow for the foreseeable future. Industry must increase annual domestic flight training output approximately 50% to meet the expected demand by 2025. Traditional recruiting methods are not sufficient; we must attract and retain a broader section of eligible workers. Only 7% of pilots are female. Fewer are aboriginal. Lack of access to financing for initial training costs is a major barrier for many.

committee hansard tran 31011 words - read the full entry at permanent link - comments: 0. Posted at 22:44 on December 04, 2018

2018-12-03 INDU 141

Standing Committee on Industry, Science and Technology

(1535)

[English]

The Chair (Mr. Dan Ruimy (Pitt Meadows—Maple Ridge, Lib.)):

Welcome, everybody, to meeting number 141 as we continue our legislative review of copyright.

With us today we have, as individuals, Georges Azzaria, director of the art school at Université Laval; Ariel Katz, associate professor and innovation chair in electronic commerce at the University of Toronto; and Barry Sookman, partner with McCarthy Tétrault and adjunct professor in intellectual property law at Osgoode Hall Law School.

From the Canadian Bar Association, we have Steve Seiferling, executive officer, intellectual property law section; and Sarah MacKenzie, lawyer, law reform.

You will each have up to seven minutes. Then we will go into our questions. Hopefully, we will have time to get it all down.

We'll start with Mr. Azzaria. You have seven minutes, please.

Mr. Georges Azzaria (Director, Art School, Université Laval, As an Individual):

Thank you.

Good afternoon, and thank you for the opportunity to speak to you today about copyright. With 186 witnesses having appeared before this committee, I hope everything has not been said.

I am the director of the art school of Laval University in Quebec City, and was previously a professor in the law faculty at Laval University for 15 years.

I will start with some general comments.

Making law is about ideas, priorities and objectives. A neutral standpoint does not exist, and a proper balance does not exist. Dozens of testimonies gave you dozens of points of view that were called balanced; none were neutral. The legislator is always making choices. That's nothing new. You all know that, of course.

Copyright law takes into account authors' rights, art practices, the concept of property, the concept of work, the concept of labour, the concept of public, and technologies. Copyright law is a cultural policy, and there are many ways to build a copyright law with these concepts.

Copyright was, historically, a way of providing revenues for authors through reproduction, retransmission, etc. In Canada, for the last 20 years, copyright has been impacted by three forces: law, jurisprudence and technology.

First, here are a few words about the law. The 2012 modifications enforced many new exceptions, among them fair dealing in education, and none of them included remuneration for authors. It was a major step back for authors.

In jurisprudence, I will remind you that, in the 1990 case Bishop v. Stevens, the Supreme Court of Canada quoted an old English decision, saying, “the Copyright Act...was passed with a single object, namely, the benefit of authors of all kinds”.

But there was a shift in 2002. The Supreme Court in the Théberge case wrote: Excessive controls by holders of copyrights and other forms of intellectual property may unduly limit the ability of the public domain to incorporate and embellish creative innovation in the long-term interests of society as a whole....

In 2004, in the CCH case, the Supreme Court invented a user's right, saying, “The fair dealing exception, like other exceptions in the Copyright Act, is a user's right.”

Théberge and CCH are based on a mythology that the authors may hide their work and not let the public get access to it.

Third is technology. With the Internet, access to art and the democratization of creation are great, of course, but they are pushing aside authors' rights and remuneration. We have witnessed the arrival of a new type of author who is not interested in copyright protection—such as Creative Commons, here before this committee—and doesn't need remuneration. With new technologies, legislators, not only in Canada, have kind of abdicated and let private corporations make the law. This is the case with Google, which redefined fair use and remuneration with Google Books, Google News, Google Images, and YouTube.

There is a shift that benefits everyone—the public, Internet providers and Silicone Valley corporations—except the authors. It's what we call a value gap. The combined result of law, jurisprudence and technology is a decline of copyright protection for authors.

I suggest that making the law means working with studies. What were the economic effects of the 2012 amendments? Did authors get more or less royalties?

Since the arrival of the Internet, authors' incomes have decreased. We did a study a few years ago in Quebec with the INRS and the ministry of cultural affairs, showing that revenues are becoming micro-revenues. I think Access Copyright, Copibec, L'Union des Écrivains and a lot of people came here to tell you that revenues have decreased.

On the other side, what are the revenues of Internet providers and Silicone Valley corporations? Did they decline?

Artists should be better protected as a social and cultural value. This is not a question of balance. The message is quite simple. If art matters, we must care about authors. The general principles of the Canadian act respecting the status of the artist should be followed.

I'll run through a couple of proposals.

First, as a general proposal, you should make the wording of the Copyright Act much simpler. The wording is quite a mess at some points. One example is that no one can really explain the distinction between non-commercial purposes, private purposes, private use and private studies. Confused and complicated rules are usually not followed.

Second, you can fix what was, in my opinion, broken in 2012. Take away all the exceptions of 2012, or keep them but add a remuneration mechanism. Canada has to comply, as you know, with the triple test of the Berne Convention. The idea is to replace authorization with a royalty, a global licence model like the private copying regime of 1997. The private copying regime was a way to answer to a technology that gives the public the possibility of reproducing work themselves and provides remuneration to the rights holders.

Third, add a resale right. I think RAAV and CARFAC testified in that sense. A resale right is a tangible way of expressing support for visual artists.

Fourth, create a fair dealing exception for creative work, which means to clarify the right to quote for visual artists and musicians.

Fifth, give a greater role to copyright collectives. They are the tangible way of making copyright functional by giving access and providing royalties. Perhaps you could think about extended collective licensing, and that could be an answer.

Sixth and finally, think about perhaps including a provision for professional authors, something that would be more coherent with the Status of the Artist Act and the notion of independent contractors.

I will conclude by saying that the question for us is to see from which perspective we are looking at copyright. The challenge is to act, as you know, like a legislator and not like a spectator.

Thank you.

(1540)

The Chair:

Thank you very much.

We're going to move to Ariel Katz, from the University of Toronto.

You have up to seven minutes, sir.

Mr. Ariel Katz (Associate Professor and Innovation Chair, Electronic Commerce, University of Toronto, As an Individual):

Good afternoon.

My name is Ariel Katz. I'm a law professor at the University of Toronto, where I hold the innovation chair in electronic commerce. I am very grateful for the opportunity to appear before you this afternoon.

In my comments today, I would like to focus on dispelling some of the misinformation about the application of copyright law and fair dealing in the educational sector.

Since 2012, Access Copyright and some publishers and authors organizations have embarked on an intensive and, unfortunately, somewhat effective campaign, portraying Canada as a disastrous place for writers and publishers. This campaign, which I call the “copyright libel against Canada”, was built on misinformation, invented facts and sometimes outright lies. Regrettably, it has slandered Canada and its educational institutions, not only at home but also abroad.

I debunked many of the claims in a series of blog posts four years ago, when the campaign started. I encourage you to read them. I also invite you to read the submissions and posts by Michael Geist, Meera Nair and others. I'm happy to provide the links to those.

Nevertheless, the copyright libel persists. It persists because it presents three simple, correct facts, wraps them in enticing rhetoric and half-truths, and then tells a powerful yet wholly fictitious story.

Here are the three uncontroversial facts.

Fact number one is that over the last few years, and especially since 2012, most educational institutions stopped obtaining licences from Access Copyright, and Access Copyright's revenue has declined dramatically. This is true.

committee hansard indu 31209 words - read the full entry at permanent link - comments: 0. Posted at 22:44 on December 03, 2018

0 words - read the full entry at permanent link - comments: 0. Posted at on December 01, 2018

2018-11-29 16:24 House intervention / intervention en chambre

Aboriginal languages, House of Commons, Official languages policy

Chambre des communes, Langues autochtones, Politique des langues officielles

Mr. Speaker, I am quite privileged that the member for Ville-Marie—Le Sud-Ouest—Île-des-Soeurs is not, in fact, on the opposite side of me politically.

When we hear about code-talking languages being used as unbroken codes during the war, I would like to finally be able to break those codes and understand them here in this House. I think it is really important that we get there.

There is one party in the House that is opposing this change on, frankly, technical grounds. I heard two speeches that did not make any sense at all. This offers us a road map for the four speakers in this House who speak one of these languages. There are four. That is all there are. We are not talking about 60 people speaking 60 different languages every single day in this place. This would offer them the opportunity to bring their language, their culture, and the history of this country into the place that is supposed to represent each and every one of us. I think we cannot wait any longer to do this.

Monsieur le Président, je me trouve assez privilégié par le fait que le député de Ville-Marie—Le Sud-Ouest—Île-des-Soeurs n’est pas vraiment à mes antipodes sur le plan politique.

Lorsqu’on parle des langues cryptées utilisées comme codes inviolables pendant la guerre, cela me porte à vouloir enfin déchiffrer ces codes et les comprendre ici, à la Chambre. Je crois qu’il est vraiment important que nous en arrivions là.

Un seul parti à la Chambre s’oppose à ce changement pour, très franchement, des motifs techniques. J’ai entendu deux discours qui n’avaient aucun sens. Cela nous dessine une carte routière pour les quatre députés qui, dans cette Chambre, parlent une de ces langues. Il y en a quatre. C’est tout. Nous ne parlons pas ici de 60 personnes parlant 60 langues différentes ici même chaque jour. Cela leur offrirait l’occasion de faire pénétrer leur langue, leur culture et l’histoire de ce pays dans l’enceinte qui est censé représenter tous et chacun d’entre nous. Je crois que nous ne pouvons pas attendre plus longtemps pour le faire.

Watch | Hansard

Ecoutez | Hansard

hansard parlchmbr tv 372 words - read the full entry at permanent link - comments: 0. Posted at 20:26 on November 29, 2018

2018-11-29 16:21 House intervention / intervention en chambre

Aboriginal languages, House of Commons, Official languages policy

Chambre des communes, Langues autochtones, Politique des langues officielles

Mr. Speaker, I hope so, but it is hard to say for sure.

That being said, giving people the opportunity to speak in their mother tongue or the language of their ancestors that they put the time and effort into learning can only advance the representation of indigenous people in the House. We know that indigenous people are massively under-represented here.

What my colleague from Sherbrooke said is absolutely right. It is important to give indigenous peoples, one of the founding nations of our country, the opportunity to speak their language here in order to encourage them to participate in our country's governance.

Monsieur le Président, je l'espère. On ne peut rien prédire.

Cela dit, avoir la possibilité de s'exprimer dans sa langue maternelle ou dans la langue de ses ancêtres qu'on a pris la peine d'apprendre ne pourrait que favoriser la représentation autochtone à la Chambre. On sait que les Autochtones sont massivement sous-représentés à la Chambre.

Alors, ce que mon collègue de Sherbrooke dit est tout à fait juste. Il est important d'offrir aux communautés autochtones, qui font partie des nations fondatrices de notre pays, la possibilité de parler leur langue ici pour les encourager à participer à la gouvernance du pays.

Watch | Hansard

Ecoutez | Hansard

hansard parlchmbr tv 227 words - read the full entry at permanent link - comments: 0. Posted at 20:26 on November 29, 2018

2018-11-29 16:10 House intervention / intervention en chambre

Aboriginal languages, House of Commons, Official languages policy, Splitting speaking time,

Chambre des communes, Langues autochtones, Partage du temps de parole, Politique des langues officielles,

Mr. Speaker, I will be sharing my time.

It gives me particular pride to rise on the 66th report from the Standing Committee on Procedure and House Affairs, and the importance of adopting this report on time for its recommendations to be in place for our imminent move to West Block.

Growing up I was taught, as all Canadians have been at least since the Official Languages Act was brought in, that Canada has two official languages, representing the two foundational nations of the country we call Canada.

Canada, of course, we were taught was an Indian word meaning home. I say Indian deliberately and without an accurate translation of ""Canada"" in this context because that is how we were taught. It was something that never made a lot of sense and as a kid I accepted the facts as they were presented to me, but I always had a twinge of doubt.

Somehow the English and the French, two western European powers, had founded Canada. However, I asked myself questions as a kid. Why was there an Indian reserve called Doncaster number 17 almost walking distance from my house? What was being reserved? What did the Indians call it? What were these Indians we had been taught ever so vaguely about if not foundational to Canada? If there was a word Canada, what was the rest of their language? If I lived in Canada, why did I not speak Canadian?

England speaks English. France speaks French. Korea speaks Korean. Japan speaks Japanese. I did not know anything about African languages. Quite frankly, we still are not really taught about how that continent got its borders and countries or how incredibly vast Africa actually is. We were not taught anything about its numerous languages, and having that knowledge would probably only have further confused my childhood-self in my quest for understanding the missing nations in Canada, because we were never really taught about colonialism either.

My father Joseph, who has since become very learned in indigenous issues and the real history, and that is not what we were taught in school but what actually happened, told me as a child that his grandfather, Alphonse Paré, a mining engineer and later Canadian cavalry officer in the First World War, spoke four Canadian languages: French, English, Cree, and Ojibwe.

They were, my father taught me, the trading languages of his day, and acting in his capacity as a mining engineer in Timmins, itself a city named by him for his uncle Noah Timmins, he did quite a bit of trading in Northern Ontario. However, he felt no need, no obligation, to pass these additional languages on to his nine children for reasons I will never know.

Just to confuse matters, Alphonse's wife, my Welsh great-grandmother Lucy Griffith, was born in Australia, and their middle daughter, ski champion Patricia de Burgh, Pat Paré, my grandmother, was born in Ireland while her father fought on the front lines in France, directly resulting in my own middle name of de Burgh.

At the same time, I learned that on my mother Sheila's side, my Istanbul-born grandfather, Expo '67 engineer Beno Eskenazi, spoke Ladino, for which he edited the Sephardic Folk Dictionary in the 1990s precisely in order to preserve that dying language, as well as Turkish, Greek, French, and English.

My grandmother, Goldie Wolofsky, spoke Yiddish, English and French. Her own grandfather, Hirsch Wolofsky, was the publisher of der Keneder Adler, Canada's first daily Yiddish newspaper. Often I could hear my grandparents speaking to each other in Spanish and Ladino, similar enough languages to be able to communicate, but both languages I did not understand. Incidentally, my grandmother and my mother, both born and raised in Montreal, were not permitted to attend French school as they were Jewish.

These languages were not passed on to me, and I wondered why. In high school, I took German classes specifically to be able to understand Yiddish, a language related to German in the way Ladino is related to Spanish. Unfortunately, I never found anyone to practice even German with, let alone someone to convert this knowledge to Yiddish. Therefore, to this day, I speak neither German nor Yiddish, though I can exchange a few basic sentences in the former.

While three generations ago Yiddish was the third-most spoken language in Montreal, after French and English, its speakers today are small in number. Part of my own culture, part of my background, has been largely lost.

My wife Mishiel is from Mindanao, an Island fraught with civil war in the southern Philippines. Her home town of Isulan has faced two fatal bombings this summer alone. She speaks Hiligaynon, Cebuano, Aklanon, Tagalog and English.

The Philippines were occupied by the Spanish starting in the early 16th century. The country is itself named for the reigning Spanish King at that time, King Philippe the Second.

In the nearly seven years since we met for the first time at the flame in front of Parliament Hill, I have wanted to learn about her culture, their culture, prior to the arrival of the Spanish. In my efforts, I have found precious little information. While there are over 40 languages spoken today across the Philippines, most are heavily influenced by both the Spanish occupation and the subsequent American influence following their takeover of the territory at the end of the 19th century, with the 1898 Treaty of Paris.

Knowing the cultures that built who we are, who our ancestors were, who our children are is not something to be taken lightly. We are each the product of where our ancestors have been, who they were and what they have done.

Many in this place have met my daughter, Ozara, as, among her many visits to the Hill, she has been here for Halloween dressed as a parliamentary page, the Speaker of the House and, most recently, a commercial-rated pilot. Not bad for a four-year-old kid, one who I hope will grow up knowing two things: first, that there is nothing in the world that she cannot do if she chooses to; and second, where she comes from through as many generations as we can discover.

When she turned one, we tried to figure out how many languages the grandparents of her grandparents are known to have spoken, and it is very likely that there are at least some languages spoken by them of which we are not aware.

Down the Paré line, Ozara is a 14th generation Quebecker, but she comes from many lines, from many countries. We know for sure that between us, we have ancestors, at minimum, from Australia, Canada, Ireland, France, Scotland, Spain, Poland, Ukraine, Russia, Turkey, the Philippines and Wales, which is, incidentally, the same size as my riding.

Over just the past three generations, her direct ancestors spoke at minimum Aklanon, Cebuano, Cree, English, French, Greek, Hebrew, Hiligaynon, Kinaray-a, Ladino, Maguindanaon, Maranao, Ojibwe, Polish, Russian, Spanish, Tagalog, Turkish, and Yiddish. Of those 19 languages, her parents, Mishiel and I, speak six, having lost 13 others along the way, and English is the only language we have in common. In my family, we have lost an average of about four languages per generation.

All of this is to say that my clarity on the whole issue of our true original languages was lacking well into my adult life. To say I fully understand it now would be a bit of a stretch.

On June 8, 2017, my friend and colleague from Winnipeg Centre rose on a question of privilege, because he had intended to speak his own cultural language, Cree, in this place and wished to be understood. The Speaker's ruling two weeks later on the topic said that this was not a question of privilege under current procedures and practices, but three months later, he wrote a letter to PROC suggesting that we take a closer look at the matter.

As a member of PROC since my arrival in this place, I said to myself, “Damn right I want to look at this topic. Who am I to tell people from this land that they cannot speak the languages of this land in Parliament, of all places?”

We often mention that we are on unceded Anishinabek lands, but we do not talk about ignoring unceded languages or disregarding unceded cultures. They are unceded in the same way. They were not given; they were taken away.

Now, to be clear, MPs can speak any language they want any time they want in this place. There is plenty of precedent, and House of Commons Procedure and Practice even addresses the issue directly. The real practical issue is to be understood. In the record, Hansard will simply say, “The member spoke in language X” and, if provided, include a translation after the fact.

Recently, the member for Ville-Marie—Le Sud-Ouest—Île-des-Soeurs rose in the House and gave an entire statement in the Mohawk language, one of several indigenous languages used as unbroken code throughout the Second World War.

He said:

On this day, the eighth day of November, we will all bring our minds together and pay our respects to the indigenous peoples who enlisted in the Canadian Armed Forces.

Let us think of them and let us remember those who fought and died in the great wars.

Let us pay our respects and let us honour those who died for us so that we could live in peace.

Let our minds be that way.

Let us remember them.

I can think of no greater irony or demonstration of our failure in this regard than that a statement by a Caucasian, delivered in this place in Mohawk, thanking indigenous soldiers for their service to defend our democracy, may only be understood a day later through a written submission, as even with a text provided, our interpreters could not tell us what was being said in a very Canadian language. These languages deserve to be understood in this House, and report 66 lays out a path to start getting us there.

I probably have some small amount of indigenous blood myself. My family being documented in Quebec since 1647, it is quite likely. The fact that I do not know for sure speaks volumes about the importance we have placed on documenting such information. It is not this possibility that motivates me. It is the fact that so many Canadians and so many people in colonized countries all over the world do not know where they are from, and as a result, who they truly are.

I know that I am the product of an enormous number of languages and cultures from all over the world that I know little to nothing about, and I personally regret that. It is not right for us to not do everything we can to preserve cultures important to the people who come from them and languages important to the people who use them.

It is doubly not right to not include languages foundational to our country in the one place that is supposed to represent everyone and everything about us. We have the option here, today, to adopt PROC report 66, which gives us a road map, a plan, a beginning to start to think about solving these issues here in the House to offer indigenous-language speaking members the opportunity to both speak and be understood in this place.

We are generations late in doing so, but with the move to West Block and the technological changes already in place in that building, it is time to act, to not delay any further. For members who do not agree, I encourage them to take it up with their caucus, itself not a Latin word but rather an unceded word from the Algonquin languages.

It is not my intention to allow my daughter to grow up not knowing this history, not recognizing that this country we call Canada, as we know it, was built on top of unceded indigenous lands, unceded indigenous cultures and unceded indigenous languages.

It is said that in North American indigenous cultures, one's value is measured not by what we have but by what we give. On that basis, these cultures and the people who represent them have infinite value, for they have given everything.

We must adopt report 66, and we must do it today. Some things can wait no longer. In case some are wondering, the Mohawk call Doncaster reserve number 17 Tioweró:ton, meaning, roughly, where the wind begins.

Monsieur le Président, je vais partager mon temps de parole.

Je suis particulièrement fier de prendre la parole au sujet du 66e rapport du Comité permanent de la procédure et des affaires de la Chambre et de souligner l'importance de l'adopter afin que ses recommandations soient appliquées dans les meilleurs délais, à l'approche de notre déménagement dans l'édifice de l'Ouest.

Dans ma jeunesse, j'ai appris, comme tous les Canadiens — du moins depuis l'entrée en vigueur de la Loi sur les langues officielles — que le Canada a deux langues officielles, celles des deux peuples fondateurs du Canada.

Évidemment, on nous a enseigné que le mot « Canada » est un mot indien qui signifie « maison ». Je fais exprès pour dire « indien », et je n'ai pas de traduction exacte du mot « Canada » dans ce contexte, puisque c'est ce qu'on nous enseignait. Lorsque j'étais enfant, je trouvais que ce n'était pas très logique. Même si j'acceptais les faits tels qu'ils m'étaient présentés, j'ai toujours eu de légers doutes.

Pour une raison quelconque, les Anglais et les Français, deux puissances de l'Europe occidentale, avaient fondé le Canada. Cependant, dans mon enfance, je me posais certaines questions. Pourquoi une réserve indienne qu'on appelait la réserve no 17 de Doncaster se trouvait-elle à distance de marche de ma maison? Qu'est-ce qu'on y réservait? Comment les Indiens appelaient-ils cet endroit? Ces Indiens dont on nous parlait de façon très vague, qu'étaient-ils s'ils ne faisaient pas partie des peuples fondateurs du Canada? Ils avaient le mot « Canada », mais à quoi ressemblaient les autres mots de leur langue? Si je vivais au Canada, alors pourquoi je ne parlais pas canadien?

En Angleterre, on parle anglais. En France, on parle français. En Corée, on parle coréen. Au Japon, on parle japonais. Je n'ai rien appris au sujet des langues africaines. Bien honnêtement, on ne nous apprend toujours pas grand-chose au sujet de ce continent, de l'établissement de ses frontières, des pays qui le composent et de son incroyable étendue géographique. On ne nous apprenait rien au sujet des nombreuses langues qui y sont parlées. D'ailleurs, toutes ces connaissances m'auraient probablement rendu encore plus confus dans ma quête de compréhension des nations manquantes au Canada, parce qu'on ne nous avait pas vraiment parlé du colonialisme non plus.

Mon père, Joseph, qui possède aujourd'hui une connaissance étendue des questions autochtones et de l'histoire réelle, soit celle qui s'est réellement produite et non celle qu'on nous enseignait à l'école, m'a raconté, lorsque j'étais enfant, que son grand-père, un dénommé Alphonse Paré qui était ingénieur minier avant d'être officier de la cavalerie canadienne pendant la Première Guerre mondiale, parlait quatre langues canadiennes: le français, l'anglais, le cri et l'ojibwé.

C'étaient, mon père me l'a appris, les langues du commerce de l'époque et, en tant qu'ingénieur minier à Timmins, une ville qu'il avait nommée en l'honneur de son oncle, Noah Timmins, il commerçait très souvent dans le Nord de l'Ontario. Cependant, pour des raisons qui m'échappent, il n'a jamais cru bon ni senti le besoin de transmettre ces langues supplémentaires à ses neuf enfants.

Pour rendre les choses encore plus compliquées, la femme d'Alphonse, mon arrière-grand-mère galloise, Lucy Griffith, était née en Australie. Leur deuxième fille, Patricia de Burgh, en l'occurrence ma grand-mère qui, soit dit en passant, fut la championne de ski Pat Paré, est née en Irlande lorsque son père combattait sur le front français, ce qui explique mon deuxième prénom, de Burgh.

Au même moment, j'ai appris que du côté de ma mère, Sheila, mon grand-père, né à Istanbul, ingénieur de l'Expo 67, Beno Eskenazi, parlait ladino. Il a d'ailleurs édité le Sephardic Folk Dictionary dans les années 1990 afin de protéger cette langue qui peinait à survivre. Il parlait aussi le turc, le grec, le français et l'anglais.

Ma grand-mère, Goldie Wolofsky, parlait yiddish, anglais et français. Son grand-père, Hirsch Wolofsky, a été le fondateur du premier journal en yiddish au Canada, le Der Kender Adler. Mes grands-parents se parlaient souvent en espagnol et en ladino. Ce sont des langues qui se ressemblent, mais je ne comprenais aucune des deux. Ma grand-mère et ma mère, toutes les deux nées à Montréal, n'ont pas eu le droit d'aller à l'école en français parce qu'elles étaient juives.

Ces langues ne m'ont pas été apprises, et je me demande pourquoi. À l'école secondaire, j'ai suivi des cours d'allemand pour pouvoir comprendre le yiddish, une langue proche de l'allemand, un peu comme le ladino et l'espagnol. Malheureusement, je n'ai jamais trouvé qui que ce soit avec qui pratiquer l'allemand, encore moins pour transférer ces connaissances vers le yiddish. Ainsi, à ce jour, je ne parle ni allemand ni yiddish, même si je connais quelques phrases de bases dans la première.

Il y a trois générations, le yiddish était la troisième langue en importance à Montréal, après le français et l'anglais, mais elle ne l'est plus du tout aujourd'hui. J'ai perdu une grande partie de ma culture et de mes origines.

Ma femme Mishiel vient de Mindanao, une île dans le Sud des Philippines aux prises avec une guerre civile. Cet été seulement, il y a eu deux attentats à la bombe mortels dans sa ville natale, Isulan. Elle parle l'hiligaynon, le cebuano, l'aklanon, le tagalog et l'anglais.

Les Philippines ont été occupées par les Espagnols à compter du début du XVIe siècle. En fait, le pays porte le nom du roi qui régnait sur l'Espagne à l'époque, à savoir le roi Philippe II.

Depuis ma première rencontre avec Mishiel il y a près de sept ans devant la flamme sur la Colline du Parlement, je cherche à en apprendre davantage sur sa culture, la culture des Philippines avant l'arrivée des Espagnols. Malgré mes efforts, j'ai trouvé très peu d'information à ce sujet. Même si de nos jours plus de 40 langues sont parlées aux Philippines, la plupart d'entre elles ont été profondément influencées par les occupants espagnols et, plus tard, par les Américains auxquels le traité de Paris de 1898 a transféré le contrôle du pays.

Il ne faut pas minimiser l'importance de connaître les cultures qui ont contribué à notre identité, à celle de nos ancêtres et à celle de nos enfants. Les endroits où nos ancêtres ont vécu, le genre de personne qu'ils étaient et les gestes qu'ils ont posés font tous de nous ce que nous sommes.

Bon nombre de députés ont rencontré ma fille Ozara. Elle m'a souvent visité sur la Colline, notamment à l'Halloween où elle est venue déguisée en page parlementaire, en Présidente de la Chambre et, plus récemment, en pilote professionnelle. Ce n'est pas mal pour une petite fille de quatre ans. J'espère qu'en grandissant, elle saura qu'elle peut atteindre tous les objectifs qu'elle se fixera et qu'elle saura d'où tous ces nombreux ancêtres viennent, du moins tous ceux que nous pourrons découvrir.

Lors de son premier anniversaire, nous avons tenté de calculer le nombre de langues que nous savions que les grands-parents de ses grands-parents avaient parlé, et il est fort probable que nous ne sommes pas au courant de toutes les langues qu'ils aient parlé.

Du côté des Parés, Ozara est une Québécoise de quatorzième génération, mais son arbre généalogique a de nombreuses branches et elle compte des ancêtres de divers pays. Nous savons avec certitude que, dans nos deux familles, nous avons des ancêtres qui viennent au moins des pays suivants: Australie, Canada, Irlande, France, Écosse, Espagne, Pologne, Ukraine, Russie, Turquie, Philippines et pays de Galles qui est, soit dit en passant, de la même taille que ma circonscription.

Au cours des trois dernières générations seulement, les ancêtres directs d'Ozara ont parlé au moins l'aklanon, le cebuano, le cri, l'anglais, le français, le grec, l'hébreu, le hiligaynon, le kinaray-a, le ladino, le maguindanao, le maranao, l'ojibwé, le polonais, le russe, l'espagnol, le tagalog, le turc et le yiddish. Ses parents, c'est-à-dire Mishiel et moi, parlent six de ces 19 langues. Nous avons perdu les 13 autres en cours de route et l'anglais est la seule langue que nous avons en commun. Dans ma famille, nous avons perdu en moyenne quatre langues par générations.

Bref, bien après avoir atteint l'âge adulte, je ne comprenais toujours pas clairement la question de nos véritables langues originales. Il serait un peu exagéré de dire que je la comprends maintenant parfaitement.

Le 8 juin 2017, mon collègue de Winnipeg-Centre a soulevé une question de privilège parce qu'il avait eu l'intention de parler à la Chambre dans sa langue, le cri, et il voulait être compris. Dans la décision qu'il a rendue deux semaines plus tard, le Président a conclu qu'il ne s'agissait pas d'une question de privilège en vertu des procédures et des usages actuels. Cependant, trois mois plus tard, il a écrit une lettre au comité de la procédure pour lui suggérer d'examiner la question de plus près.

Étant membre du Comité permanent de la procédure et des affaires de la Chambre depuis mon arrivée à la Chambre, je me suis dit: « Bien sûr que je veux étudier cette question. Qui suis-je pour dire à mes concitoyens qu'ils ne peuvent pas parler les langues de ce pays au Parlement? »

Nous mentionnons souvent que nous nous trouvons sur des terres ancestrales et non cédées des peuples algonquins, mais nous ne parlons pas du fait que nous ignorons des langues et des cultures non cédées. Elles sont toutes non cédées de la même manière: elles n'ont pas été données, mais prises de force.

Précisons que dorénavant les députés peuvent parler n'importe quelle langue à la Chambre. Il existe de nombreux précédents. Il en est même question dans La procédure et les usages de la Chambre des communes. Le problème, bien concret, est de se faire comprendre. Dans le hansard, il sera indiqué « Le député s'exprime en langue X », suivi de la traduction, si elle a été fournie.

Récemment, le député de Ville-Marie—Le Sud-Ouest—Île-des-Soeurs a pris la parole et a prononcé son discours entièrement en mohawk, l'une des nombreuses langues qui ont servi de code indécryptable durant la Deuxième Guerre mondiale.

Je le cite:

En ce [jour], rassemblons tous nos esprits et rendons hommage aux peuples autochtones qui se sont portés bénévoles pour s'engager dans les Forces armées canadiennes.

Pensons à eux et rappelons-nous ceux qui se sont battus et sont morts dans les grandes guerres.

Rendons hommage et honorons ceux qui sont morts pour nous, afin qu'aujourd'hui nous puissions tous vivre en paix.

Tel doit être notre état d'esprit.

Nous nous souvenons.

Je ne peux imaginer plus grande ironie ni plus grande preuve de notre échec dans ce domaine que le fait qu'une déclaration prononcée en mohawk, dans cette enceinte, par un homme blanc pour remercier les soldats autochtones d'avoir défendu notre démocratie ne puisse être comprise que le lendemain quand on en a produit une traduction écrite puisque, même si on leur avait fourni le texte, nos interprètes ne pouvaient nous dire ce qui était dit dans une langue pourtant tout à fait canadienne. Ces langues méritent d'être comprises à la Chambre. Le 66e rapport propose une façon d'atteindre cet objectif.

Il est probable qu'il coule un peu de sang autochtone dans mes veines. Comme les documents sur ma famille au Québec remontent jusqu'à 1647, c'est bien possible. Le fait que je n'en sois pas certain en dit long sur l'importance qui a été accordée à la conservation de ce genre de renseignements. Ce n'est pas cette possibilité qui me motive. C'est le fait que tant de Canadiens et de gens dans les pays colonisés du monde entier ne savent pas d'où ils viennent et, par conséquent, qui ils sont vraiment.

Je sais que je suis le produit d'un très grand nombre de cultures et de langues provenant du monde entier et sur lesquelles je ne sais à peu près rien, chose que je regrette. Nous ne pouvons justifier de ne pas faire tout ce que nous pouvons pour préserver les cultures importantes aux yeux des gens qui en sont issus et les langues importantes aux yeux des gens qui les parlent.

Nous aurions doublement tort de ne pas inclure les langues qui sont à la base même de notre pays à l'endroit qui est censé représenter tous les Canadiens et tout ce qui les concerne. Nous avons la possibilité, ici, aujourd'hui, d'adopter le 66e rapport du Comité permanent de la procédure et des affaires de la Chambre, lequel nous donne une feuille de route, un plan, un point de départ, pour commencer à songer à résoudre ces questions ici même afin d'offrir aux députés qui parlent une langue autochtone l'occasion de s'exprimer dans cette langue à la Chambre et d'être compris.

Cela aurait dû se faire il y a des générations. Toutefois, compte tenu du déménagement dans l'édifice de l'Ouest et des changements technologiques déjà en place dans ce bâtiment, il est temps d'agir sans plus tarder. J'encourage les députés qui s'y opposent à soulever la question auprès de leur caucus, qui n'est pas un mot latin, mais plutôt un mot algonquin qui n'a jamais été cédé.

Je n'ai pas l'intention de laisser ma fille grandir sans connaître cette histoire, sans reconnaître que ce pays que nous appelons le Canada, tel que nous le connaissons, a été fondé sur des terres autochtones non cédées, des cultures autochtones non cédées et des langues autochtones non cédées.

Dans les cultures autochtones d'Amérique du Nord, on dit que la valeur d'une personne se mesure non pas par ce qu'elle possède, mais par ce qu'elle donne. Ainsi, ces cultures et les gens qui les représentent ont une valeur infinie, car ils ont tout donné.

Nous devons adopter le 66e rapport, et ce, aujourd'hui même. Certaines choses ne peuvent plus attendre. Pour ceux qui se posent la question, les Mohawks appellent la réserve no 17 de Doncaster Tioweró:ton, ce qui signifie, en gros, là où le vent se lève.

Watch | Hansard

Ecoutez | Hansard

hansard parlchmbr tv 4375 words - read the full entry at permanent link - comments: 0. Posted at 20:26 on November 29, 2018

2018-11-29 15:32 House intervention / intervention en chambre

Aboriginal languages, House of Commons, Official languages policy

Chambre des communes, Langues autochtones, Politique des langues officielles

Mr. Speaker, I sincerely hope today is the last day we have to hear indigenous speeches in the House without the use of translation.

The opportunities are in this report. Should the member wish to speak in this way the next time, she will be able to inform the Table and interpretation will be provided. It is very sad to hear the interpreters' booth go silent when we are listening to a speech. I would have loved to have heard everything the member said in real time. This is more of a comment than a question.

I very much appreciate her pushing us to do this, to have participated in the study and to have demonstrated the importance and need for it in the House today.

Monsieur le Président, j'espère sincèrement qu'aujourd'hui est le dernier jour où l'on parle une langue autochtone à la Chambre sans avoir recours à des services d'interprétation.

Ce rapport en offre la possibilité. Si la députée souhaite parler dans sa langue la prochaine fois, elle pourra en informer le Bureau, qui lui fournira des services d'interprétation. Il est fort triste d'entendre le silence provenant de la cabine d'interprétation quand on écoute un discours. J'aurais aimé comprendre en temps réel tout ce que la députée a dit. Il s'agit davantage d'une observation que d'une question.

Je lui suis très reconnaissant de nous avoir incités à adopter cette mesure et à participer à l'étude et de nous avoir montré l'importance et la nécessité d'une telle chose à la Chambre aujourd'hui.

Watch | Hansard

Ecoutez | Hansard

hansard parlchmbr tv 275 words - read the full entry at permanent link - comments: 0. Posted at 20:26 on November 29, 2018