LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA
Tuesday, May 31, 2022
Madam Speaker: O Eternal and Almighty God, from Whom all power and wisdom come, we are assembled here before Thee to frame such laws as may tend to the welfare and prosperity of our province. Grant, O merciful God, we pray Thee, that we may desire only that which is in accordance with Thy will, that we may seek it with wisdom and know it with certainty and accomplish it perfectly for the glory and honour of Thy name and for the welfare of all our people.
We acknowledge we are gathered on Treaty 1 territory and that Manitoba is located on the treaty territories and ancestral lands of the Anishinaabeg, Anishininewuk, Dakota Oyate, Denesuline and Nehethowuk nations. We acknowledge Manitoba is located on the Homeland of the Red River Métis. We acknowledge northern Manitoba includes lands that were and are the ancestral lands of the Inuit. We respect the spirit and intent of treaties and treaty making and remain committed to working in partnership with First Nations, Inuit and Métis people in the spirit of truth, reconciliation and collaboration.
Good morning, everybody. Please be seated.
Hon. Wayne Ewasko (Acting Government House Leader): Can you please call for second reading of Bill 240, The Jewish Heritage Month Act.
Madam Speaker: It has been announced that the House will consider second reading of Bill 240, The Jewish Heritage Month Act.
Mr. Ron Schuler (Springfield-Ritchot): Madam Speaker, I move, seconded by the member for Rossmere (Mr. Micklefield), that Bill 240, The Jewish Heritage Month Act, be now read a second time and be referred to a committee of this House.
Motion presented.
Mr. Schuler: What a great morning to be here in the Manitoba Legislature and to be debating a wonderful bill that we have before us. This bill is a long time in coming and I would like to start off by recognizing we have many guests in the gallery, and I'll be naming them shortly. And I just want to say what a blessing the Jewish community is to this city and to this province.
I'd also like to extend very warm and heartfelt greetings on behalf of the Premier of Manitoba (Mrs. Stefanson), as this Chamber will know that our Premier and our PC government are strong supporters of the Jewish community. We stand with the people of Israel. We also support Israel's rights to defend itself and acknowledge the Jewish historic claim to Israel. We are very pleased to be putting this resolution forward.
Joining us today–and I would point out to the Legislature, on this incredibly wet and soggy day, so we're really pleased with the turnout today–we have Gustova Zetner [phonetic], president, Jewish Federation of Winnipeg; Carol Duboff, director, Jewish Federation of Winnipeg; Jason Gisser, director, Jewish Federation of Winnipeg; Patrick Elazar, director, Jewish Federation of Winnipeg; Elaine Goldstine, chief executive officer, Jewish Federation of Winnipeg; Adam Levy, public relations and communications director, Jewish Federation of Winnipeg; Gavin Rich, president, Asper Jewish Community Campus; Rabbi Allan Finkel, chair of the Manitoba council of rabbis; Bonnie Charm [phonetic], president, Jewish federation of Manitoba; Belle Jararski [phonetic], executive director, Jewish Heritage Centre of Western Canada; Judi Price-Rosen, Gray Academy of Jewish Education; Eden Amivelek [phonetic], student, Gray Academy of Jewish Education; Emery Rosen, student, Gray Academy of Jewish Education; Mac Eilberg, student, Gray Academy of Jewish Education; and from B'nai Brith, Dr. Ruth Aserov [phonetic], regional director, Manitoba, and Adriana Glickman; and from the Jewish Foundation of Manitoba, John Diamond, CO.
We would like to welcome all of them. And I know I've missed a few individuals. And I know one of my most favourite people, I've missed in this list, because the member for Rossmere is going to mention her, but we also welcome everybody who's not on this list. The member for Rossmere is going to do that. For instance, Shelley Faintuch, who's got to be one of the most beautiful people on this earth and we just all love her so much. But the member for Rossmere is going to actually introduce her.
So, thank you all for being here today. And what a great day to be here and celebrating this. And we want to say to all of those from the Jewish community, how much we appreciate what they do here and what they do for our community.
So I know there's going to be some questions if there were consultations on this legislation, and yes, there was a lot of consultation. In fact, it was the Jewish community–the Jewish federation of Manitoba that felt May would be a great month. It aligns with the 350th anniversary of Jewish people in North America, which was celebrated in 2004. And the Jewish community felt that this would be a really good month in which to celebrate and line up all kinds of activities. Again, it will designate the month of May as Jewish heritage month.
We're really excited, the fact that not just will we be celebrating the Jewish community at the various religious ceremonies and, for instance, Folklorama, which is just absolutely amazing to go to the Jewish pavilion–I would recommend for those members who haven't been. It is just amazing, the production. It is so exciting to be there and I look forward to it.
I believe, this year, we're going to have Folklorama again. Won't that be great? And I look so forward to being, again, a guest at the Rady centre and being part of Folklorama and the Israeli pavilion. That's just one of the highlights, of course, of Folklorama.
The Jewish community has brought amazingly rich culture and diversity and has been incredibly supportive, and Madam Speaker, I do want to pause and thank the leadership of the Jewish community in regards to their work and efforts that they are doing–that they did, for instance, for the Yazidi people, who are one of the most persecuted religions, and also now with the Ukrainians and the individuals out of Ukraine, and the leadership being shown out of the Jewish community is always just impressive.
And, again, they will point out to you that they are a people that understand probably more than anybody what it means to be persecuted, what it means to flee, and what it means to need help. And the Jewish community is always one of the first voices you hear saying, we would like to help, when it comes to a crisis, an issue like this.
And to the leadership up in the gallery, I want to thank them for that and for the fact that they always show a leadership. And it is–it does not go unnoticed in the community; it does not go unnoticed across Canada.
So, not just are you a positive force in this province, when it comes to making Manitoba a better place, you're also a force to be reckoned with when it comes to helping others come to Manitoba and have a better life. And I know I speak on behalf of all members of this Chamber, how much we appreciate and we cherish that.
* (10:10)
I just want to point out to our visitors in the gallery, I am restricted to 10 minutes, so I am trying to speak very quickly to make sure I get through my notes.
And we also want to be very clear that we understand that there's always anti-Semitism amongst us, and it's a very ugly thing. It shows itself sometimes more than the year previous, and our government has taken some very strong stands in making sure that we deal with those. We know that when one of these hate groups get going, or anti-Semitism in this case, it becomes a cancer and it can affect and grow, and it must be dealt with harshly and immediately. And we stand with the Jewish community, because we want our Jewish community in Manitoba to flourish and grow, and never should we tolerate anything resembling anti-Semitism.
So I–just for the record, before my time runs out–Jewish immigration began in Manitoba almost 150 years ago. In the spring of 1882, approximately 350 Russian Jews fleeing czarist persecution arrived in Winnipeg. They had been assisted in their journey by the Mansion House Committee in London. It is from these difficult beginnings that subsequent generations of Jewish Manitobans established their community in Winnipeg and Manitoba. And, again, what a blessing you have been to this province and to this country.
Before my time runs out, there are approximately 14,000 individuals in Winnipeg who identify of being of Jewish background, compromise–approximately 2 per cent of the total population in Winnipeg. So, they are the 12th largest ethnic group in the province–or in the city, I should say–and have an amazing impact. We appreciate the fact that not just do–does the Jewish community promote itself and its organizations, they're also very important in helping other communities promote themselves, very important in science and education and in health. We see how much effort is put in and amounts of monies that are donated to help other citizens in Winnipeg and Manitoba and, frankly, Canadians. The kind of donations that come from the Jewish community are sometimes just overwhelming, how much is donated by the community.
So I am going to just say that, as one member of this Legislature–and I was here when we approved the Holocaust memorial on the grounds, I've tried to be at every Yom Hashoah–we stand squarely and firmly as a government, on behalf of our Premier (Mrs. Stefanson) and members of our Legislature. Want to be very clear that we stand squarely with you and we appreciate you very much.
And we are just incredibly honoured to be able to do this, to proclaim May Jewish history month, and to be able to, when this is done–hopefully, we can pass this today–when this is done, that we can celebrate a lot of the events that I'm sure you're going to plan during that month.
I look so forward to being there and greeting all of you, and thank you for being here. And I'd like to thank my colleagues for speaking to this and hopefully passing it today that it can move on and become legislation.
Thank you, Madam Speaker.
Madam Speaker: A question period of up to 10 minutes will be held. Questions may be addressed to the sponsoring member by any member in the following sequence: first question to be asked by a member from another party; this is to be followed by a rotation between the parties; each independent member may ask one question. And no question or answer shall exceed 45 seconds.
Mrs. Bernadette Smith (Point Douglas): I just want to acknowledge the guests today in the gallery. Thank you for coming and joining us. We appreciate, you know, all of the work that you've done to make Manitoba a great province.
I am from the North End of Winnipeg, so I've lived there all my life, so I've, you know, seen and had many friends and, you know, know lots of people that have made Point Douglas and the North End the great community it is.
So I'd like to ask the member: What actions does the government have planned to help Manitoba's Jewish community in more concrete ways that this legislation?
Mr. Ron Schuler (Springfield-Ritchot): Well, Madam Speaker, we are always standing with the Jewish community, that if there is any kind of an event around the world, our government is always prepared to welcome Jewish immigration into Manitoba should there be a need for people to flee a country that they're in. And we will continue to stand with the Jewish community, and our door is always open to be able to accept any kind of request that comes from the Jewish community.
Mr. Andrew Micklefield (Rossmere): Thank you, colleague, for bringing this forward. This is a great piece of legislation, and I look forward to speaking in support of it, in a few moments.
I'd like to ask if you could comment–if the member could comment about some of the Jewish heritage and cultural experiences he's experienced and enjoyed here in our city of Winnipeg?
Mr. Schuler: Unfortunately, I don't have unlimited time to speak to that question. But I will mention the fact that Folklorama, for instance, is just an amazing event, and I would like to compliment all of those that are involved with the pavilion. It is just amazing. It's packed. You're lucky if you can even get in. And the show is just amazing and it really does highlight Jewish culture, and it's just wonderful to be there. And there are all kinds of other activities that we take part in; however, I believe my time is run out for my answer.
Hon. Jon Gerrard (River Heights): I wonder if the member would expand a little bit on the reasons for May being chosen, and also, extend that into, what are the plans for future Mays, in terms of celebrating Jewish heritage month?
Mr. Schuler: I would like to thank the member for River Heights for that question. I know what a great supporter he is of the Jewish people. And we've 'suirved' here for a long time. That's why he asked me about four questions in this one question.
So, this was asked for by the Jewish community. They feel that this is a significant month. What they're going to plan for that month? I think they're going to let us know. And I thank him for his support of this legislation, and I want to always make sure that I thank him for his leadership when it comes to supporting Israel and the Jewish community.
Mrs. Smith: I know the member from previous had asked why the month of May, so I'll ask the minister again: Why was the month of May chosen? And what events are planned in the month of May?
Mr. Schuler: Well, Madam Speaker, I believe I answered that question. The month of May was put into legislation because that was what was chosen by the Jewish community. They felt that it was significant. May was chosen by the Jewish federation of Manitoba as this aligns with the 350th anniversary of Jewish people in North America, which was celebrated in 2004.
And the events that are being planned? You know what, maybe I would suggest to the Jewish community, they should put me on their planning committee, so that we would know all of that, and I could keep bringing it to this House as we get things planned. But you know what, they probably can do it all without my help, but I'll always put that offer out there.
Mr. Ian Wishart (Portage la Prairie): I'd like to thank the member for Springfield-Ritchot (Mr. Schuler) for bringing forward this bill.
I wonder if the member could share with us what impact this bill might have on his constituency?
Mr. Schuler: Well, Madam Speaker, we all have members of the Jewish community in our constituencies, and I would say that every time I've had something to do–whether they were coming into my office to get pins or flags, or wanted to raise an issue, it's always a very positive experience.
And they always have an incredibly positive impact on the community. I've said this before, and I will say it again, that the Jewish community has been a blessing on this city and on this province, and we thank them very much for what they contribute to our society. And they have an amazingly positive impact on the communities of Springfield, Ritchot and Niverville.
Mrs. Smith: I just want to acknowledge, you know, their contribution to the General Strike that happened in Point Douglas and, you know, their contribution to the old-age pension that's happened in Manitoba.
Wonder if the member can speak about some of the challenges that the Jewish community is facing today?
Mr. Schuler: One of the things I believe the Jewish community is always very vigilant about and one of the things that they face is the one thing that they are the most concerned about is anti-Semitism. And that's one of the things that we, as legislators, have to be very vigilant on to make sure that we do not allow anti-Semitism–and, for that matter, any other racism, homophobia, any of those kinds of things–we have to make sure that we do not allow that kind of behaviour to take place because it is dangerous. And we know from history where that can lead to. So I don't speak for the Jewish community, but I would suspect that is one of the major things that faces the community, that they're the most vigilant about is to make sure that anti-Semitism does not raise its ugly head.
* (10:20)
Mr. Micklefield: I'm wondering if the member could share if there are any other jurisdictions that have similar legislation, similar kinds of legislation, if this is–would be the first of its kind, or if there are other places that have taken steps similar to the one that he's proposing this morning.
Mr. Schuler: Madam Speaker, other jurisdictions have passed such legislation. Other jurisdictions have debated this kind of legislation, so we are not the first. This should have been something that should have come years ago, but best time, if you don't have something, is to do it today. So we're going to put this forward today. Hopefully, it'll pass. We'll get, hopefully, unanimous agreement this morning and we can let it move on to committee.
And I would like to thank the Jewish community for having raised this with the Manitoba Legislature and allowed us to have this debate and pass this piece of legislation, but it has been debated and it has been passed in other jurisdictions.
Mrs. Smith: I remember growing up in the North End and, like, we were all relatives. We all supported one another. And I know the member talked about anti-Semitism. Like, there was none of that growing up. A lot of us saw each other as equals, supported each other, fed each other, opened our homes to each other.
So I member–if the member can talk about the difference that he sees, you know, from let's say the early 1900s to now, and even since he's been elected, the changes he's seen in the community, the Jewish community specifically.
Mr. Schuler: Well, Madam Speaker, I could maybe speak about the 1970s and the 1980s and moving on, so my memory doesn't quite go back that far. I am the member for Springfield-Ritchot, not the member for Elmwood (Mr. Maloway).
That having been said, there is a concern. And there is a concern that we are seeing in many jurisidictions the rise of anti-Semitism. We see it ebb and flow even in this city, in this province. It cannot be tolerated.
I agree with the member opposite. I mean, we grew up in a kinder, gentler time, just on all sides, in all respects. And that's why we have to remain vigilant. That's why these kinds of moves are very important, that we make it very clear anti-Semitism is not acceptable in our society.
Mr. Micklefield: Now, earlier, this member said that he doesn't have all day to list off some of the benefits of the Jewish community, so I know that he still doesn't have all day, but I would like to give him just a few more seconds to list off some of the great things that he can think of, and maybe some of the great people, some of the great events, some of the great organizations, pretty much anything great that he would like to talk about in the few seconds remaining on–about the Jewish community, about the Jewish heritage, Jewish contributions.
So I want to give this member a sort of carte blanche, go for it. We have 37 seconds left, and I'm–welcome him to put on the record anything he's forgotten or would like to.
Mr. Schuler: Madam Speaker, I don't know if the House conveyed upon me unlimited time, but it didn't sound like that. I'd like to point out some individuals: 1920s, Dr. Maxwell Rady, the first Jewish physician to be granted privileges at St. Boniface Hospital; '50s, Adele Wiseman, famous novelist from Winnipeg; 1963, Maitland Steinkopf, first Jewish Cabinet minister in Manitoba; 1966, Sidney Spivak, MLA for River Heights and Cabinet minister, he was minister of Industry and Commerce in Duff Roblin's Progressive Conservative government; Dr. Arnold Naimark was named the first Jewish dean of medicine at U of M and later became the university president.
The list goes on and on. I know my time has run out. I don't have unlimited–we could go on forever and we would like to thank the Jewish community for its contributions to society here in Winnipeg and Manitoba.
Madam Speaker: The time for this question period has expired.
Madam Speaker: Debate is open.
Mr. Nello Altomare (Transcona): Thank you, colleagues.
I'd like to acknowledge our guests today in the gallery. It's great to have you here. I know how important this is and I'm enjoying the debate this morning and learning more about the community.
I will keep my remarks brief, but also want to highlight some–a few things, Madam Speaker, to ensure that they get on the record. It's a great opportunity to review the story of the Jewish Manitoban experience and recognize contributions that Jews have made to our province.
We also take today the opportunity to reiterate the Manitoba NDP's commitment to fight anti-Semitism, Madam Speaker. And we encourage and support the Jewish community as they continue to practise their faith and culture in this province.
The first Jews that settled here in the late 1870s, early 1880s, mirroring the experience of many other settlers here on Treaty 1. Many began on the railroad industry, working in farms and then began to establish themselves. And something that is very important is that they persevered–persevered and established the very vibrant community here in the Treaty 1 territory.
Many Jews were also involved in the labour movement, Madam Speaker–one that was quite prominent, of course, was the Winnipeg General Strike, and took a prominent leadership role. One of those was Abraham Heaps, who was one of the leaders of the General Strike and elected to Parliament in Winnipeg North in 1925 where he served until 1940, and he used his position in a minority government that followed to really push for Canada's first old-age pension. And what an achievement, and what an accomplishment–one that we enjoy to this day, so that when a person retires, they're able to enjoy their retirement somewhat comfortably, and it's a very important step in Canadian history.
I do also want to say that Joe Zuken, another prominent left-wing politician that served the City of Winnipeg, was quite instrumental in many pieces that really identify our city right now. I can list them, but I would–I'd run out of time.
The tradition of political activism, Madam Speaker–the Jewish community, continues. Many prominent provincial politicians were from the Jewish community–included Saul Miller, Saul Cherniack, Sidney Green–all Cabinet ministers in the Schreyer government; Roland Penner in the government of Howard Pawley; Sidney Spivak, the former head of the PC Party of Manitoba; and Israel Asper, the former head of the provincial Liberal Party.
A few other things: there is a great resource out–to learn more about the history of the Jewish community. It's the Jews in Winnipeg, produced by the National Film Board, in the 1970s. It's available for viewing online. It gives a general overview of the Jewish history up to the '70s.
And this is where my experience comes in as a boy growing up in Transcona. There was a very vibrant Jewish business community, Madam Speaker. I remember–I'm sure the member from Radisson might remember too–some of the stores that were up and down Regent Avenue. Certainly, Joe and Stella Blostein and their son Mitchell Blostein's store. We had Max Katz Dry Goods.
I remember as a little boy, going up and down the street, I'd always pester my parents. I needed to get a model to build from Max's store–Max Katz–and I still remember going in there. Of course, I never got what I always wanted, but every time that we went in there, I'd get a shirt. Never had a choice about it, but Max would always come out and have a bunch ready for my mother as she walked in. And of course, we walked out with many pieces from that particular establishment.
Of course, we have Bruce Rosner, Steven Mintz in Transcona–prominent businessmen that have Transcona Optical. Growing up, as a little boy, too, I remember Dr. Gorenstein the dentist in the area, as well, Madam Speaker, who–all prominent people in the community of Transcona that I represent, all supported by our community. And as I recall, as–again, just like the member from Point Douglas pointed out, we all supported each other, and important parts of, certainly, my upbringing. I mean, everyone remembers going to Blostein's store. It's still an experience that's just etched in my brain, because there are just certain things that you just don't forget.
You also remember, like, I mean, with all of these pieces, is that it's the sights, sounds and smells that you recall. And I still have those in my memory, and one that–very fond. You know, we were talking about–I know I heard the member from Springfield–no, sorry, is it Springfield-Ritchot, right? Yes–saying that, you know, these are pieces that really solidify our upbringing and also we–growing up in simpler times, but they were times where it was important to support each other. And, certainly, we felt that support from the business community and we were in Transcona, and the important role that Jewish Manitobans played in establishing that community in my part of the world.
* (10:30)
I just want to also add that, as they, you know, began to establish themselves in Winnipeg, being in east Winnipeg, there was–we never got a chance to see the old Videon channel 9 show that highlights–it's called the Jewish Hour, Madam Speaker–we never got that on the–I don't know if we ever got that on the east side of Winnipeg or not, but I know it was on Videon. And it outlined all kinds of gossip that was going on and certainly provided news in Yiddish as well, as well as with some Jewish folks on. So, a great piece and, again, available if–I'm sure it's available on YouTube now, just search it up and you'll find some of these nostalgic pieces that I know the member from Springfield-Ritchot referred to the '70s–I grew up in the '70s; he's a little older than I am, though, I think. So–but, anyway, these are indeed fond memories, and we do want to highlight that.
I also want to address anti-Semitism, Madam Speaker. We are proud of our history here in Manitoba, and the opportunity for Manitobans of all faiths and ethnicity to practise their faith and ethnicity, and that's important. We acknowledge anti-Semitism of the past and that still, unfortunately, remains present in Manitoba. We know we have to fight against that, we have to be vigilant and we have to ensure that that does not rear its ugly head in this part of the world. We have a sacred trust here and we have to ensure that we maintain that. We're also committed to addressing anti-Semitism in all forms.
I just want to wrap up my comments, Madam Speaker, by saying thank you to our guests here in the gallery, for adding your contribution to this bill and for ensuring that your voice, your community, is included and celebrated here in Manitoba. It's an accomplishment, and it's my honour to put a few words on the record and to give a Transcona perspective to some of this piece here.
So, I'll wrap my comments up with that, Madam Speaker. Thank you.
Mr. Andrew Micklefield (Rossmere): I rise this morning in support of Bill 240, The Jewish Heritage Month Act, which would make May Jewish heritage month. The month of May is chosen as it is typically the month when the holiday of Ha'atzmaut is celebrated, commemorating the Israeli day of independence in 1948, following the Holocaust and establishing the nation of Israel.
The traditional date for this Jewish holiday is calculated by the Jewish calendar and is sometimes moved to honour the Sabbath, so it's less predictable on our calendar, hence the more broad month of May as the month that we are proposing this morning.
This bill is an opportunity for the Legislature to send a message of support and solidarity to the Jewish people in our city and province at a time when anti-Semitism is sadly on the rise faster and more frequently than any other hate crime and occurring in our very neighbourhoods.
Madam Speaker, I do not say that as a matter of sentiment, but as a matter of fact. Anti-Semitic hate crimes are the most reported in Canada, they are the most reported on the Prairies, and they are catalogued and reported in an annual report and, sadly, those numbers have been steadily increasing in recent years. I acknowledge this, I categorically condemn these anti-Semitic acts and statements and other things that happen and stand today with the Jewish community in supporting this bill.
I also want to publicly recognize the Holocaust as a historic event which did happen, Madam Speaker. I want to publicly state, for the record, that the Holocaust was a time of unspeakable evil, and it is my opinion, I will–you will not hear me using the word Holocaust for other horrendous events.
I believe that the Holocaust was a stand-alone event. Not to minimize other horrendous events, and I've been to other parts of the world and been involved with other communities, but the unique evil of the Holocaust stands unparalleled in our memory, and we recognize it as such.
So, Jewish heritage month. The Jewish people that I've known have always been a blessing to me personally. And Shelley Faintuch, I wish to recognize her today as a smiling, bubbly, joyful person who brightens the room whenever she walks into it.
So–and I certainly do want to thank the many members of the community who've come to join us this morning and certainly honour you and your community and those you represent and the values that you stand for as well.
I would be amiss if I did not put on the record some of the contributions of the Jewish community to our city and province.
So, Madam Speaker, I'm going to start in 1892 when Mordecai Weidman founded the Shaarey Zedek synagogue and also, interestingly–I didn't know this, but Mr. Weidman also helped to establish the first YMCA in western Canada in that same year. Not long after, in 1904, Moses Finkelstein of the Conservative Party was the first Winnipeg Jew elected to city council.
In 1910, S. Hart Green, a Liberal, was elected to the Manitoba Legislature and the first to sit in an Canadian Assembly; 1918, Samuel Rosner was the mayor of Plum Coulee; 1920s, Dr. Maxwell Rady, many of us familiar with the Max Rady school of medicine, was the first Jewish physician to be granted privileges at the St. Boniface Hospital.
In the 1950s, Adele Wiseman was a famous Winnipeg novelist.
In 1963–I hope I'm saying these names correctly, please forgive me if I'm not–Maitland Steinkopf was the first Jewish Cabinet minister in Manitoba. In 1966, Sidney Spivak was the MLA for River Heights and a Cabinet minister, ministry of Industry and Commerce in Duff Roblin's government.
In 1971, Dr. Arnold Naimark was named the first Jewish dean of medicine at U of M and later became university president.
In 2004, Dr. Cheryl Rockman-Greenberg, head of the department of pediatric and child health at U of M; in 2012, she was named one of the top most 100 powerful women in Canada by Toronto-based Women's Executive Network.
In 2004, Rosalie Abella was the first Jewish woman and refugee to sit on the Canadian Supreme Court bench.
Sol Kanee chaired the Community Welfare Planning Council, Society for Crippled Children and Adults and United Way; also, the Royal Winnipeg Ballet, the board of governors of the University of Manitoba and the Sharon Home.
Madam Speaker, there is much Jewish heritage to celebrate and we do so unashamedly and unitedly this morning. I'd also like to recognize the Jewish Foundation of Manitoba, the Jewish foundation of Winnipeg, The Asper Foundation, The Asper Jewish community centre, the Jewish Post and News, the Winnipeg Yiddish Committee, the Jewish Federation of Winnipeg, the Jewish Child and Family Service, Chabad-Lubavitch of Winnipeg, Rady JCC fitness centre, the National Council of Jewish Women of Canada. And if I'm forgetting anybody, please forgive me.
My point today is that Jewish heritage is not just a sentiment. It is a reality in our city and in our province, and I'm proud to speak in support of this bill, in support of the Jewish people. I'm not ashamed to say that I do stand with Israel. I believe in the right of the Jewish people to exist as a nation and to defend themselves against aggression which in no other context would be tolerated or allowed. This doesn't necessarily mean we agree with every policy of the Israeli government, but it certainly means that we agree that there should be such a government and that the Jewish people have every right to live in their homeland and also peacefully here.
I hope today we can send a united message of support, of embrace, and pass this legislation. I will sit down and allow others to speak. Madam Speaker, thank you for the opportunity.
Hon. Jon Gerrard (River Heights): Madam Speaker, I speak to this bill, which is an important and significant one. I want to recognize the members of the Jewish community in Manitoba who are here. Thank you for coming and thank you for your contributions to Manitoba and to Canada.
When I grew up in Saskatoon, my best friend in high school was a member of the Jewish community in Saskatoon. And I learned much from him, just as I have learned a great deal from many others who I have met along my life's journey. In Montreal, when I was at medical school, there were many of my fellow students and members of the local McGill campus Liberal club who were Jewish, so we had many good times together.
* (10:40)
Here, in Winnipeg, I have been fortunate to represent River Heights, and many people in the Jewish community. I think there are some wonderful traditions from the Jewish heritage, one of which we celebrate–or recognize, I should say, not necessarily celebrate, but recognize–every year, and that is that every person has a name. And that I think is fundamentally important in terms of human rights and in terms of recognizing people.
And, of course, the story of the Holocaust is something that is a tremendous dark period in global history as well as in Jewish history. The Jewish community, in making a major effort to address anti-Semitism, has really led the way in looking at how we can address movements against various religious, ethnic and other groups. And I think it's tremendously important to see that leadership, not just as a move to decrease the amount of anti-Semitism, but as a part of a larger effort that we need to make globally to address, you know, efforts to dismiss or denigrate people of other groups.
One of the things that happens every year in May is the Winnipeg International Jewish Film Festival, which was May 14th to June 1st. And I happened to be at a documentary on Sunday, titled, Unusual in Every Way. And it was produced and directed by Don Barnard and Yolanda Papina-Pollock. And, really, is a story about a unique friendship between an Indigenous man with autism and PTSD and a renowned professor from Israel, Solly Dreman, and his wife Orly. And as they–this friendship developed, the Dremans invited Don Barnard, who is an Indigenous man with autism and PTSD, to come and visit in Israel.
And so this is a documentary of Don Barnard's life, his experience of how he developed the PTSD and his visit to Israel–which really was a turning point in his life, he was struggling a great deal up to that point–and the friendship that he developed with Solly and Orly Dreman, and helped by others in the Jewish community, including Larry Vickar, made a great difference in his life.
But it also, in this documentary, talked about something that I had never really thought about or appreciated before. And the question was asked, you know, after this incredibly dreadful, traumatic Holocaust, how is it that Israel can be doing so well, currently? It can be an example in terms of technology, in terms of democracy for the world?
And the answer came from a psychologist who talked about the fact that not only after trauma can there be post-traumatic stress disorder, but there can also be post-traumatic growth. And to a large extent, that was what happened in Israel, that the community came together, united in resiliency and has shown tremendous strength, and I think that it is not only a strength of people in Israel but a strength of Jewish people around the world.
I had the chance a number of years ago to visit Israel, and one of the extraordinary people that I met was a man by the name of Yossi Leshem. Now, he had studied bird migration extensively, and I happen to have an interest in birds and bird migration. And he had started out using radar to follow and track birds. And the work that he did has actually turned out to be extraordinary in that, by tracking when the birds are migrating, he can–he's actually been able to help the Israeli Air Force in decreasing a number of collisions between planes and birds and, in fact, to save many lives.
But one of the things which I felt was really extraordinary was that these birds migrate along a corridor from southern Africa into northern Europe and northern Asia, and they migrate through Israel in very large numbers because there is a tendency for birds to migrate, not over large bodies of water like the Mediterranean, but around those bodies of water, and so there's a huge, huge migration of birds through Israel.
And Yossi Leshem was using his work, and is using it today on a continuing basis, to build bridges between countries along the migration corridor of the birds as a way of building bridges between people in Israel and people in many other countries. I think it's a remarkable story that is not adequately known and needs to be known much more in terms of how the Jewish people in Israel are not just helping people in Israel, they're actually working and building bridges actively with people around the world.
So it is with, you know, great feeling and passion that I support this resolution, and I support the fact that we will now recognize May as the Jewish heritage month and be able to celebrate annually, to recognize the extraordinary contributions of people in the Jewish community to Manitoba, to Canada and to the world.
Thank you for coming today. It's wonderful to see you all here, and my remarks and well wishes go out to all those who are not able to come here today but are part of the Jewish community in our province of Manitoba.
Thank you, Madam Speaker.
Mr. Ian Wishart (Portage la Prairie): I would like to thank the member for Springfield-Ritchot (Mr. Schuler) for bringing forward this bill, The Jewish Heritage Month Act. Very timely and, of course, very well appreciated by many sides in this House.
And I'd also like to thank the members of the Jewish community for coming here today and, in particular, the members from Gray Academy. I know that the Jewish community is very strong on making sure that the young folks understand their background and heritage, and the Gray Academy has played a major role in that for many years. And also summer camps and extra activities like that that they use as opportunities to make sure that all members of their community are very much aware of their history and their background, and we've touched on that in a number of ways here already today.
Just a few comments–I know that much of the focus has been on the impact, in particular, on Manitoba as a whole, but the city of Winnipeg, in particular. Being from a rural area, it–we are certainly also benefiting from the presence of Jewish members in our community. I know that there's hardly a rural town in Manitoba, or city, that has not had positive influence from members of the Jewish community in our community.
Very often they like to populate the professions or the business community and are very much appreciated. The member for Transcona (Mr. Altomare) mentioned some of his experience with the business side of the community, and that's felt far and wide across Manitoba and greatly appreciated. That presence is still there. We still see it every day and in many rural communities, and I know in many of the professions, there is a significant presence of Jewish individuals in those professions. So that is certainly appreciated.
And I also know that the Jewish federation and other members of the Jewish community are very strong on protecting their history and background and reacting when there's anti-Semitism or any other form of racism that is brought forward in the community.
* (10:50)
And we all benefit from that, frankly. They are the first to react and very often, that's–leads the rest of us to realize that there is something going on in that community that needs to be addressed. And that is important, not only for themselves, but for other types of minorities across the province.
But they are–they do more than that, Madam Speaker. They also react positively when there's a need. They volunteer, they contribute very generously to deal with issues not only here in Canada and Manitoba, but around the world.
And that is the kind of human being and kind of Canadian and kind of Manitoban that we want to see and that we greatly appreciate.
Now, I know that we want this to come to a vote, and so I will not speak for very much longer, but I would like to express, again, my appreciation to the people that have joined us today, and we look forward to strong support across the House on this bill.
Thank you, Madam Speaker.
Madam Speaker: Are there any further members wishing to speak in debate?
If not, is the House ready for the question?
Some Honourable Members: Question.
Madam Speaker: The question before the House is second reading of Bill 240, The Jewish Heritage Month Act.
Is it the pleasure of the House to adopt the motion? Agreed? [Agreed]
I declare the motion carried.
Mr. Wishart: Is it the will of the House to call it unanimous?
Madam Speaker: Is it the will of the House to call it unanimous? [Agreed]
It has been passed unanimously.
Hon. Wayne Ewasko (Acting Government House Leader): Can you canvass the House to see if there's will to call it 11 o'clock?
Madam Speaker: Is it the will of the House to call it 11 o'clock? [Agreed]
Madam Speaker: The hour is now 11 a.m. and time for private members' resolutions. The resolution before us this morning is the resolution on Improving Protections for Vulnerable Women and Children, brought forward by the honourable member for Radisson.
Mr. James Teitsma (Radisson): I move, seconded by the honourable member for Seine River (Ms. Morley-Lecomte),
WHEREAS the of rate domestic violence, sexual assault, and other random acts of violence has been on the rise across Canada; and
WHEREAS the victims of these types of crimes are primarily women, children, and vulnerable Manitobans; and
WHEREAS the Federal Government needs to enact strong measures to protect those who are vulnerable to these types of crimes; and
WHEREAS recently the Supreme Court of Canada has struck down one of the sections of the Criminal Code of Canada that worked to ensure that perpetrators are held to account for their actions; and
WHEREAS with the removal of section 33.1 of the Criminal Code of Canada, the Supreme Court has reinstated the ability for a perpetrator to claim extreme self-induced intoxication as a defence and shield themselves from the consequences of their actions; and
WHEREAS this change has no protection and no benefit for the victims of these crimes; and
WHEREAS the Federal Government needs to make stronger protections to ensure those who commit these crimes are held accountable.
THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba call on the federal government to rectify the law in Canada that currently allows perpetrators to claim voluntary intoxication as a defence and solve this gap by providing critical protections to women, children and the vulnerable from becoming the victims of violent or sexual crimes.
Motion presented.
Mr. Teitsma: This is an important debate. This hour is an important hour. It's important that we all work together to ensure that this resolution is passed by this House because we have here an opportunity.
It's an opportunity to show the citizens of our province, Manitoba, to show the citizens of this country that the members of this House, despite our differences in some things, are united in others and on this topic we are united.
We are united in support of victims of domestic violence. We are united in support of women, children and other vulnerable persons. We are united in using our voices for what is good and just and right and fair. We believe that individuals, perpetrators–commit crimes like homicide, sexual assault, domestic violence while being voluntarily extremely intoxicated should not be excused from those crimes.
Mr. Brad Michaleski, Acting Speaker, in the Chair
For those of you who may not be aware, just over two weeks ago now, the Supreme Court ruled that the section 33 prohibition on using voluntary extreme intoxication as a defence in cases of homicide, domestic violence and assault was unconstitutional. Consequently, they struck down that part of the law. Until the federal government acts to create new laws, women, children and other vulnerable persons will have no legal protection against violence committed by those who are extremely intoxicated.
The Women's Legal Education and Action Fund, who intervened in this case, warns that allowing the defence of voluntary extreme intoxication privileges individual rights over those of vulnerable groups, including women and children, who disproportionately bear the risks of intoxicated violence. It will continue the harm caused to women as a result of intoxicated violence is devastating and infringes on their right to security and equality. Holding individuals accountable for violent crimes committed in a state of self-induced intoxication is a pressing and substantial objective, given that a failure to do so excuses such violence and discourages reporting as an option for survivors. End quote.
When evaluating laws and policies and programs, as we do in this House, it's important that both the intended and the unintended consequences be considered. While the intended consequences of the Supreme Court decision are simple enough to understand–they ensure that you cannot be held directly accountable for actions you committed when you were effectively unconscious–the unintended consequences are even more clear in the eyes of the public, and especially so in the eyes of those who are under threat of violence from an intoxicated partner or former partner.
This action of the Supreme Court, if not immediately responded to by the federal government, will encourage more intoxicated violence against women, children and other vulnerable persons. This action will discourage survivors of domestic abuse and sexual violence to report or to press charges or to seek help. Instead, they will suffer, often alone.
I remember just a few short months after I was first elected as the MLA for Radisson, a young woman, maybe in her mid-20s, entered my office. She asked to speak with me. She was very clearly and visibly afraid because she had suffered abuse–physical violence–at the hands of her intimate partner. And then she'd been retraumatized by recounting every gruesome detail in a court, while in an effort to have him jailed. He was out on bail in a matter of hours. What jail time he did serve was insignificant. The courts had put a restraining order in place, forbidding him from having contact with her, but he'd violated that order. He'd even entered her home while she was away. Often his violence was accompanied with intoxication.
Now, the consequences to him for violating the restraining order were negligible. The consequences to her were profound. She lost faith in society's ability or even desire to protect her and to keep her safe. She lost trust in the police and in the courts to provide justice. She daily feared for her life. She truly believed that he would not stop until she was dead, until he killed her. And she was asking for my help. She was the first woman in this kind of circumstance to come to my office and ask for help, but she was not the last. Soon after, another woman in a similar situation came into my office asking for my help, and then another, and another, and another.
* (11:00)
I suspect some of the members opposite and those on my side of the House may have had similar experiences–it's heartbreaking. No one should have to live with that kind of fear.
While I can appreciate that sometimes men are the victims of intimate partner violence, the simple fact is that the vast majority of such assaults are committed by men against women, or by men against children.
My commitment to the women who asked me for help and to many others who I've spoken with is that I will stand up for women, that I will confront issues of sexual violence and assault head on, that I will never remain silent or cover things up, that I will hold those who commit violence against women and children and other vulnerable individuals accountable for their actions.
Today's debate's not the only action that's being taken on this file. Yesterday, the Minister of Families (Ms. Squires) introduced Bill 43, and that can help. Federally, I've been in contact with MP Raquel Dancho and encouraged her to support a Senate bill, 205, which seeks to amend the Criminal Code in respect of interim release and other orders regarded–related to intimate partner violent offences. And it's that bill, too, that I hope will be of particular benefit to women living in fear of violence.
Today's resolution focuses specifically on the use of voluntary intoxication as a defence for committing crimes.
I want to thank the Minister of Justice (Mr. Goertzen) for his leadership on this file. After the Supreme Court ruling was made, he immediately called upon the federal government to act. He did not hesitate to say and to do what he believed was right. He stood up and continues to stand up for the rights of vulnerable individuals, including victims of intimate partner violence and sexual assault.
What I'm asking this Legislature today is that his voice not be alone, that we as legislators from all sides of this House unite our voices and, together, tell the federal government they must act. They must act promptly. They must act effectively. They must stand up for victims. They must stand up for justice. They must fill this gap in our legal framework created by the Supreme Court.
There's a variety of solutions that parliament can pursue, and perhaps I'll allow the Minister of Justice (Mr. Goertzen) to get into those. But I just want to say to this House, the time is now. This is our last chance to consider this matter for several months. Every day that goes by without addressing this shortcoming, more victims will suffer. More victims may choose to remain silent or otherwise fail to achieve justice. More women and children and vulnerable people will live in fear. The consequence of failing to pass this resolution cannot be understated. The time is now. Let's unite our voices and, together, send a strong message in support of women, children and other vulnerable persons.
Thank you.
The Acting Speaker (Brad Michaleski): A question period of up to 10 minutes will be held, and questions may be addressed in the following sequence: the first question may be asked by a member from another party; any subsequent questions must follow a rotation between parties; each independent member may ask one question. And no question or answer shall exceed 45 seconds.
Mr. Diljeet Brar (Burrows): I want to thank the member for Radisson for bringing this resolution, which is very important, and it talks about protection of women, children and the vulnerable Manitobans. This is a serious issue.
I would like to ask the member, has the provincial government conducted any legal analysis of the Supreme Court's decision?
Mr. James Teitsma (Radisson): Sorry, I didn't have my earpiece in, so I hope I understood the member's question correctly, but I believe he was asking if our provincial government had done detailed analysis as part of bringing this resolution forward.
I hope he can appreciate that–the short time frame that we've been dealing with. It was really less than two weeks ago that the Supreme Court, I would say, shocked me–I'm certain, shocked many others in this country–with the decision that they made. And the decision to say something about it, and to do something about it, had been made quickly in response to that.
So I think the Minister of Families (Ms. Squires)–perhaps you can bring up that question again in question period. The Minister of Families would probably have a lot of good things to say about what–
The Acting Speaker (Brad Michaleski): The member's time is expired.
Ms. Janice Morley-Lecomte (Seine River): I want to applaud my colleague from Radisson for bringing forward this very important resolution.
What are improvements that this government has made to help survivors of domestic violence?
Mr. Teitsma: I thank the member for also adding her voice to mine and seconding this resolution and for being supportive throughout the process of bringing it forward.
Our government has done a lot. I think, you know, two of–big things that I would highlight is the first Gender-Based Violence Committee of Cabinet that we–we created that, and that we committed to preventing and to responding to gender-based violence through a whole-of-government approach.
I think the other significant thing that we've done is our change in funding for the family violence protection funding–protection program with the women's shelter funding model. Again, that whole-of-government approach is coming to bear–
The Acting Speaker (Brad Michaleski): The member's time has expired.
Mr. Brar: I would like to ask the member, what practical steps does the member believe the federal government can take to address the impact of the Supreme Court decision?
Mr. Teitsma: I thank the member for that very relevant question.
I think I hinted that the Minister of Justice is better–both better qualified and better equipped to answer those specific questions.
But, you know, as an example of how it could be done, is we could ask the federal government to enact laws saying that it was criminal negligence to become that, voluntarily, that extremely intoxicated.
And so that the same way that you–if you voluntarily drive a car very, very fast and then you kill somebody in doing so, that's criminal negligence causing death. And that's a crime that you can be tried for.
So there is a variety of solutions, and, in fact, the judges themselves on the Supreme Court, if I understand correctly, did spell that out in their judgment about some of the paths that the federal government could consider.
Mr. Greg Nesbitt (Riding Mountain): Thank you to the member from Radisson for putting forward this very important resolution this morning.
Who has your research shown are most often survivors of domestic abuse and violence, and how do these changes impact these survivors?
Mr. Teitsma: I thank the member for the question.
I think I spoke–touched on it briefly during my speech. Victims are primarily women, primarily Indigenous women here in this province, certainly, and disproportionally, I would say. And the impacts on them cannot be understated.
The impacts of this judgment to me would cause women who were previously already fearful to lose all hope. And that's something that rests on us as legislators. We need to take that very seriously. And we need to do better, and I'm convinced that we can.
Ms. Cindy Lamoureux (Tyndall Park): I'd like to thank the member for bringing forward this legislation today. And I understand all levels of government have a very important role to play in the safety and security of, in our case, Manitobans.
And I'm wondering what the Province is doing to help with Victim Services here in Manitoba?
Mr. Teitsma: I thank the member for the question.
I think, you know, when we look at what we're doing with women's shelters and ensuring that there's enough, that they have the resources that they need, that there's adequate supports for survivors of family violence.
* (11:10)
So those are some of the things that are being done, and, of course, there's the remedies that I spoke about in the courts with regards to restraining orders and those kinds of things. And the enforcement of those orders is extraordinarily important. And I think about what could be done. I encourage the member to look at Bill S-205 and perhaps encourage other federal legislators that she might know to get in support of that bill, also, because I think there's a real opportunity there–
The Acting Speaker (Brad Michaleski): The member's time has expired.
Mr. Brar: Section 33.1 of the Criminal Code was put in place in 1995 to address the use of a defence based on extreme intoxication.
Can the member tell us how many such applications for such a defence are made?
Mr. Teitsma: The shortest answer I could give is, no. But I cannot give a specific answer as to how often that would be made. And I suspect there's members of his own caucus that might have a better sense of what–how intoxication can be considered in a court of law.
But in terms of defence, I think the challenge that the courts have in this case is that there's a level of intoxication that qualifies you for using that defence. And that level has to be, essentially, you are completely out of control of your own actions. It's called automatism. I think it's a difficult thing for the courts to determine and I'm concerned about that, and I hope that the federal government also thinks about how difficult that line might be for prosecutors–
The Acting Speaker (Brad Michaleski): The member's time has expired.
Ms. Morley-Lecomte: Can the member from Radisson tell us why it is important that we have a collaborative approach with the federal government?
Mr. Teitsma: I thank the member for that question.
It's just the nature of government in Canada is that we have laws at a provincial level, we have authorities at a provincial level and we have others at a federal level. And it's important that those work well together because, you know, as our police forces and our courts deal with these matters, they are guided and bound by federal legislation. And so it's important that we all, especially on these kinds of things where there should not be any political bias whatsoever, that we all get our–in step with each other and that we stand up for victims.
Mr. Brar: My question to the member is, how does the trauma of crime affect families and communities? How does the trauma of crime affect families and communities?
Mr. Teitsma: I thank the member, and I especially thank him for the repeat, because I didn't get it the first time.
But the trauma of crime affecting families, I don't think it can be understated. You know, I think about children. You know, my parents, actually, were foster parents, and when they brought sometimes children into their home, these children had experienced abuse. They'd essentially had crimes committed upon them, and the impact of that trauma stayed with those children for decades.
It cannot be understated. It is profound in its impact on our society, and I think that's why we need to take it very seriously today in this House and I'm pleased with the tone that we're establishing so far. I hope it continues to the morning and that we're able to pass this resolution.
Mr. Nesbitt: I'd like to ask the member, what are some of the improvements that he believes the federal government can do to help support survivors of violence?
Mr. Teitsma: I thank the member for that question.
I think, you know, most pressing would be to fill this gap. And the courts themselves recognize how important that is. Some of the interveners in the case made it very clear, and I quoted them, as to how important that is. So that's No. 1 that the federal government can be doing.
Number 2, looking at legislation like Bill S-205, I referred to. What this lets victims do is people who have a reasonable suspicion, or a reasonable level of fear that the courts determine is reasonable, they can actually have recognizance orders applied against them, even things like an ankle bracelet or something like that, in order to maintain safety and protection for the potential victim.
The Acting Speaker (Brad Michaleski): Time for questions has expired.
The Acting Speaker (Brad Michaleski): The floor is now open for debate.
Ms. Lisa Naylor (Wolseley): I thank the member for Radisson (Mr. Teitsma) for bringing forward this resolution to improve protections for vulnerable women and children. I believe that all levels of government should do everything they can to keep people safe from violence, especially those who are most vulnerable in our society.
In 1995, section 33.1 was added to the Criminal Code specifically to address criminal actions con-ducted while under self-induced extreme intoxication. The courts have now struck down section 33.1 of the Criminal Code. The federal government needs to consider this matter and must ensure that victims are protected and receive justice.
At the same time, much more can be done to address the root causes of crime and violence. We need to ensure protection for vulnerable Manitobans and everyone else living in this province from violent crime. This includes a robust health-care system, including free health care for newcomers, for international students. It includes education, mental health and addiction services and recreational opportunities so that communities can be safer long term.
Addictions treatment is a very important part of this issue. We should be doing everything possible to help people struggling with addictions to get the help they need to protect their own lives and protect the people around them.
We also need long-term housing solutions for Manitobans experiencing homelessness or those fleeing violence and abuse, and we need to ensure there are proper policies and laws in place to address these issues and support all levels of government in examining this issue properly in light of the Supreme Court decision.
Mr. Deputy Speaker, the NDP is a party that believes in second chances. I believe in second chances. And I know that with accountability, treatment and supports, perpetrators of violence can change. But change is only possible with accountability. Accountability must come first. Removing section 33.1 from Criminal Code is a mistake, because it does allow perpetrators to shield themselves from the consequences of their actions, and this change has no benefit or protections for the victims of crime.
Mr. Deputy Speaker, just in the past 10 days, our community has experienced the loss of three Indigenous women to violent crime: Tessa Perry, age 31; Doris Trout, age 25; Rebecca Contois, age 24. Tessa, Doris and Rebecca are just some of the women that the member refers to when he talks of vulnerable women. But Tessa, Doris and Rebecca were not made vulnerable by anything other than a society that continues to throw away Indigenous women and governments that don't do enough to change the circumstances that create vulnerability.
While Indigenous women are not the only ones made more vulnerable by the removal of section 31.1 of the Criminal Code, we know that in this province and across the country they do remain the most vulnerable to violence. Indigenous women are killed at nearly seven times the rate of non-Indigenous women.
It's been five years since the release of the interim report and the Calls to Action from the missing and murdered women and children inquiry–women and girls inquiry, pardon me. I want to remind this House of just some of the Calls to Action that have not yet been met by this government. I think this is an important resolution, but I also think that if members were serious about these protections for vulnerable women and children, they would also turn their attention to policies here in Manitoba that would make a difference.
The inquiry called on the Province to publicly acknowledge and condemn violence against Indigenous woman and girls. The inquiry called on the need for public education and awareness about violence against Indigenous women and girls. We need to do more in both these areas. There's a need for compensation for family members and a healing fund for survivors. The inquiry called on the need for properly resourced initiatives and programs to address root causes of violence against women and girls.
We need to do so much more. This also includes addressing poverty, access to safe housing, access to safe transportation, accessible and culturally appropriate help, mental health and addiction services. This Province needs to do so much more.
* (11:20)
There is the need to protect Indigenous women involved in sex work and to address trafficking of Indigenous women and children. There is the need for culturally appropriate and equitable judicial processes and supports. The Calls to Action also include the need for healing programs for Indigenous perpetrators of violence and more restorative justice programs.
The member for Radisson (Mr. Teitsma), in addition to this motion, should and could push his government to move much faster on these areas of provincial responsibility while he works to hold the federal government to account for their areas of responsibility.
Madam Speaker, more than four in 10 women have experienced some forms of intimate partner violence in their lifetime. That's just intimate partner violence. That's not the–all the violence that happens in the community. In 2018, 44 per cent of women reported experiencing some form of psychological, physical or sexual violence by an intimate partner in their lifetime.
Violence costs lives. Approximately every six dates, a woman in Canada is killed by her intimate partner. And the toll on those who are harmed is significant. It's hard on their children. Children who witness violence in the home have twice the rate of psychiatric disorders as children from non-violent homes. And it costs billions of dollars–$7.4 billion annually in Canada to deal with the aftermath of spousal violence alone.
We know that criminal victimization is frightening and unsettling. It can be unpredictable; it's 'dehabilitating' and demoralizing. Its effects can often be long term and difficult to overcome. Victimization can cause trauma. We know that victims of all crimes can be affected emotionally, physically, financially, psychologically and socially. And families of the victims are also affected by trauma. There's ripple effects, not just for children, but it puts other family members at increased risk for mental health issues, substance use issues and sometimes leading to unhealthy behaviours themselves.
And we know that circumstances around crime are often complicated. But we need to invest in supports, the supports that I mentioned such as helping people out of poverty, meaningfully investing in programs and housing, things that help marginalized individuals in communities to be safer, to make safer choices for themselves. We know that these investments in social supports are essential to making fewer people actually vulnerable.
We're committed to enhanced addiction supports and safe consumption sites, and we know that safe consumption sites can better connect people struggling with addictions with the resources that we need. We will continue to advocate for investments and services that address the root causes of crime, such as health care, education, mental health and addiction services and recreational opportunities so that communities can be safer long term.
Mr. Deputy Speaker, we know that crime can affect every aspect of a person's life and that, you know, whether it's financial, physical, emotional, social, I understand why this resolution was brought forward. And I agree that it needs deeper consideration by the provincial–by the federal government, but I also call on our provincial government for deeper consideration of all the ways that they can work to make people less vulnerable to crime in the first place.
And some of the things we can do to help people that are victims of crime, such as compensation and support. For women and children, we can provide better security through education, pay equity and even free counselling and therapy programs. Wait-lists for therapy across this province are longer than they've ever been.
So, while I support this resolution, I call on the government to do their part to protect vulnerable women and children in this province. Thank you.
Hon. Kelvin Goertzen (Minister of Justice and Attorney General): I want to begin by thanking my colleague, the member for Radisson (Mr. Teitsma), who's brought forward this resolution; who I know, after the Supreme Court decision came down on this particular issue, very quickly reached out to me and said, I believe there's something we need to do, as legislators. And this is something that the public is very concerned about, and he very quickly got about getting this resolution brought forward.
And I want to commend him, because it's not the first time that he has reached out to me–or others, I think, within the government–to say, this is something we need to take action on. And while it's difficult as a provincial Legislature to move decisions of the Supreme Court, or even Parliament when it comes to the Criminal Code, there is an important element of speaking out against certain issues, so I really want to commend again, the member for Radisson for the work he's done here and in many other areas of the Legislature and the province more generally, Mr. Acting Deputy Speaker.
I want to begin by tabling a letter, if I could, that I sent to the federal Justice Minister, Mr. David Lametti, after the Supreme Court decision came down–not just simply to complain, as sometimes we do about issues, federally, but also to offer assistance, and to say that the provincial Department of Justice wants to work with the federal government in addressing this situation.
And this situation is that the Supreme Court struck down a provision in the Criminal Code that said that if an individual voluntarily–and that's key, Mr. Acting Deputy Speaker–voluntarily became so intoxicated that they didn't know what they were doing, that that couldn't be used as a defence.
And I want to re-emphasize the issue that this is voluntary intoxication. This is an individual who has decided to become so intoxicated through a particular use of a drug, or a combination of drugs, that they didn't know what they were doing and then they committed a violent act, often against vulnerable individuals, women, children, maybe the elderly.
And we've seen this in real cases, Mr. Acting Deputy Speaker; very, very disturbing cases. In fact, there was a case like that, a home invasion and a sexual assault that was before the Supreme Court that led to this particular decision. And so the Supreme Court indicated and said that you could now use your voluntary, extreme intoxication as a defence. And many Canadians, and then, certainly, many victims groups reached out to me and to other Attorneys General and said, this can't be, and there needs to be something we can do to change this.
And, thankfully, the Supreme Court, even though I don't agree with the decision, they did indicate a pathway forward. So the issue, and the nub of this, Mr. Acting Deputy Speaker, is that when an individual commits a crime–and there are, of course, members in the Chamber who are trained in the law and will know this, and others who would just know it from other interactions with the law–they generally, for many crimes, you have to have what's called a mens rea, you have to have an intent to commit a particular crime. So when it comes to issues like first degree murders often cited, an individual had an intent to commit murder; had the mens rea, the minds–active mind to commit that crime.
But there are other provisions within the Criminal Code and other pieces of legislation that refer to negligence, where an individual doesn't necessarily have to have an intent to commit a particular act–so, negligent of homicide, when it comes to driving, and negligent–other sort of negligent issues causing death. You didn't have to intend to kill somebody. You didn't have to intend to cause that act. But you didn't use the standard of care that an individual should normally be expected to use. And because you didn't use that standard of care, an action happened and then you are responsible for that action.
So, driving is one that's often cited. You may have been driving–not you, Mr. Acting Deputy Speaker, but in the general terms, somebody may have been driving 150 kilometres an hour, in a area marked as 80 kilometres an hour; they get into an accident that maybe cause–you know, negligent driving, causing death. They didn't drive that speed with the intention of killing somebody, but because they acted in such a way that was beyond the standard of care that we would expect for somebody, they can still be held responsible for that act, even though they didn't have the intention for that particular outcome.
* (11:30)
So the Supreme Court said in this situation, Parliament could look to negligence and put in a criminal offence for negligence where you got so extremely intoxicated that you could still be held responsible, even though you may not have had the mens rea, the intention to commit the particular crime that you were charged for.
So we've said to the federal Minister of Justice, we're willing to work with you. And this has to happen quickly. This gap has to be filled quickly because it is in many ways, an affront to what people believe justice should be. And it's important that individuals, citizens generally–Canadians, Manitobans–believe in the justice system, that they have faith in the administration of justice. And this is something that has caused them to lose faith in the administration of justice. But the Supreme Court gave a pathway forward to correct–what I believe and what others believe–is a concern and a problem now, and to try to fix that gap.
And even though it would be a relatively small number of people who likely would be eligible for this particular defence–that they voluntarily got so extremely intoxicated, they didn't know what they were doing, so they shouldn't be held responsible for a violent crime or other sorts of crime–they're so heinous, those particular situations and the victims are so impacted that the small number of individuals that might apply to, in my view, is irrelevant, because the individual victims are impacted for a lifetime. And, more broadly, it does cause people to lose faith in the administration of justice.
So, Mr. Acting Deputy Speaker, this is a situation where I think that there are other Attorneys General, I know, who have written to the Minister of Justice, federally, where we could come together and quickly work with Parliament so they could bring forward provisions to have something in the Criminal Code that would be an actionable offence and that you wouldn't be able to use the defence of, I was so drunk, I didn't know what I was doing.
Now, there are other issues beyond this that have caused some concern in the last several days and weeks regarding decisions that the Supreme Court in Canada–on Friday of last week, the Supreme Court decided that in cases of mass murder–and this was related to the individual who was convicted of, I believe, six killings in a mosque in Quebec, and six other attempted murders, where they reduced, essentially, their sentence from consecutive 25-year sentences to it being concurrent, to ensure that an individual has the right for a parole in a much shorter period of time than they would have otherwise.
That is also something that I think has raised concern among Canadians. When it comes to issues of mass murder, and we know–you know, been discussion about what's happening in the United States, but this is a Canadian context, and there are situations–whether it's somebody driving down the street in Toronto, or whether it's RCMP officers, a number who were killed–or, in this particular situation, individuals who were in their house of worship who were killed, who were targeted. And to not be able to have those sentences run consecutively, instead have those lives, essentially, the value of them being diminished, that is a concern. So we've also spoken out about that.
So even though we're a provincial Legislature and we don't have responsibility for the Criminal Code, there are things that we can do, and we've done it in the past, where we can send signals that are very important, that we all agree as individuals–and I heard my friend speak before me about concerns about, you know, Victim Services and other sort of rehabilitative services when it comes to addictions. Those are all valid points to make, Mr. Acting Deputy Speaker, and I don't begrudge the member for making those points.
But it also doesn't prohibit us from passing this resolution to send a strong message that we are concerned that the defence of extreme intoxication should not stand, that we should be able to work with the federal Liberal government–who I think is willing to work on this issue, in fairness, Mr. Deputy Speaker–to fill that gap in the Criminal Code.
And I think it begins with the Legislature saying in a united voice that we all believe that this is something that should happen quickly, that the gap should be filled quickly on behalf of the victims, many of whom are women, children, the elderly and other vulnerable individuals. And it's an important opportunity to bring this forward today and have it pass.
And I, again, want to thank my friend, the member for Radisson (Mr. Teitsma) for seeing this as the priority that it is, and for bringing it to the floor of the Legislature this morning.
Thank you very much, Mr. Acting Deputy Speaker.
Mr. Ian Bushie (Keewatinook): Thank you, Mr. Acting Deputy Speaker, for the opportunity to share a few words on this morning's resolution, the–Improving Protections for Vulnerable Women and Children.
In reading the resolution, I'm a little disheartened by that in the fact that the provincial government still continuously refers responsibility and needed action to the federal government. I've listened to the questions this morning, I've listened to debate from both sides, including members from the government side of the aisle, about doing more and things we could do.
And it's a matter of, while this resolution is paperwork brought forth by this government, and if this resolution gets passed by this government, it's just going to be pushed on to Ottawa and referred to Ottawa as, here, we've done our part, now you fix it, now you bring all the resources, now you bring the action. When there is definitely–most definitely–and I've just heard the Minister of Justice (Mr. Goertzen) refer to, yes, there is things we could do and things we could do as government.
So, that being said, Mr. Acting Deputy Speaker, then let's back up those words. Let's put concrete action into place, rather than just referring the responsibility to the federal government. And it's mentioned time and time again, this resolution is–also highlights the disproportionately affected women in Manitoba, children and, more specifically, Indigenous women here in Manitoba. So there is definitely things to be done by the government here in Manitoba to support those actions that are much needed.
Sure, absolutely, there is things–Criminal Code–as part of what Ottawa needs to do, supports Ottawa needs to also provide. But there can't be that jurisdictional argument when it comes time to support. Victim Services–the question was asked about that and being able to further invest in that. And when the question was asked, well, what are you doing, I believe the answer from the member from Radisson was, we've done a lot. But yet, what have you really done? How have you really supported?
Just this morning, I was reading the article about predators that are coming out. We had, last year, a number of communities that were evacuated, so they were here down in the city in various hotels–a number of hotels. And then they had predators going to that hotel, again, targeting vulnerable women, vulnerable children. So, on a provincial level, we needed to see that support, too. We needed to see support doing that–not just Ottawa, and it was Ottawa that's–in the article that I read, had paid to have those kind of services in those hotels. But there was also a role for the provincial government to do there, too–which again backed off, said, federal responsibility, you deal with that.
So it's clear the words that are being brought forth by this government, the actions are not following that up, the programs are not following that up. There is programs that members opposite will stand up and they'll talk about, this is what we're doing, we're doing tremendous amount of work–but you're not. You're acknowledging the problem, you're acknowledging the situation, but you're putting very minimal effort and very minimal supports to back up that glowing and that glaring problem that you see, and that's where you need to improve.
Not just bringing forth a resolution to pass on to a different level of government and say, it's your fault, you fix it. Again, what are you doing at this level? What are you doing at this level to get those supports, to have everything kind of–as you say, we're doing tremendous work–well, it's not shown anywhere. And the programming and the lack of programming and the cuts to programming to the most vulnerable people here in society is just non-existent by this government.
You've–there's buzzwords that this government will give: vulnerable Manitobans, disproportionally impacted. Well, back up those words. Back up those words with true funds and resources and programs that will really, truly help that, instead of trying to pull out a reason to blame somebody else.
* (11:40)
There's–when things come up, and the government is also recognizing–and I will give the government credit in that–they are recognizing the problem, they are recognizing the situation. But it's–there's no proactive approach to be able to deal with those issues. It's always a reactive approach. And it's always, for the most part, a band-aid solution that this government comes up with.
And it shouldn't be upon a victim and a vulnerable Manitoban to say, hey, I need help. This government should also be out there being proactive, to bring out programs, to help alleviate that stress. Because when a victim is victimized, Mr. Acting Deputy Speaker, and then they have to get out there and prove it to the government that this is happening, prove it to the government that this is a part of what's affecting a demographic in society and in disproportionally affected communities–when they have to get out there and prove that and talk about that over and over again, that's just revictimization by this government.
And that's just shameful to be able to have that go on here, and then have members opposite stand up in the Chamber, stand up in the media and make announcements saying, we're doing the best we can, when clearly you're not, or we wouldn't be having those discussions on a daily basis, on an hourly basis in some communities. And it's happening right here in 2022. We're still having those discussions. And we're still being–and chasing down the government to react, because they have no proactive response to be able to bring these issues forward.
So when we go forward, Mr. Acting Deputy Speaker, we need to be eyes wide open with this. It can't be out of sight, out of mind, and that's the way this government seems to look at things. If there is no pressing issue in the media, or if there is nothing right there that's getting society to really call out the government on, then they don't want to deal with the issue. And that's not being proactive. Again, it's being reactive.
There's been a number of instances just within the last week, Mr. Acting Deputy Speaker, where our most vulnerable members of society, in particular Indigenous women, are losing their lives, are losing their lives to domestic violence, are being targeted, are being eliminated, are being murdered, are being abused.
And this government can sit there and say, we're doing the best we can. Well, if you're doing the best you can, then why is this still happening today? Why is this still happening day in, day out for the last number of weeks, let alone years and decades? If you're doing the best you can, then why is that happening?
This is happening right here in Manitoba. Yes, it's happening in Canada, so there was responsibility of the federal government to be able to do their part too. But the Province for sure has a role to play here, has resources and actions that they can do and that they can bring together.
And we've talked about making issues non-partisan and not politicizing issues. And when we're dealing with victims of abuse, vulnerable members of society, that should be an issue that's truly non-political, non-partisan. Well, let's work together on that, then. Let's not put issues forward that's going to help drive a wedge between different political parties, different MLAs, for that matter, Mr. Acting Deputy Speaker.
So this resolution, when it's brought forward to here–and I've heard the question-and-answer period go back and forth and the debate go back and forth, and it's clear that this is not enough. There can't be that deflection, again, to somebody else's responsibility. And that's exactly what this government is doing, deferring that responsibility to somebody else.
When we read the content and the title of the resolution, it's something that everybody absolutely could support. But what I call on is this government to do more, because you're not doing enough. You can do more and you're not doing it, and that's just the plain truth of the matter. You need to do more. You have that ability to do more. And you need to do more.
Miigwech.
Introduction of Guests
The Acting Speaker (Brad Michaleski): Order. I would just like to make one acknowledgement. We have some guests in the gallery who are just arriving. I know they won't be here for very long, but we–in the public gallery, from École communautaire Réal-Bédard [phonetic], 13 grade 9 students under the direction of Brian Martel. This group is located in the constituency of the honourable member for La Vérendrye (Mr. Smook).
We welcome you to the House today.
* * *
Ms. Cindy Lamoureux (Tyndall Park): I'm going to keep my remarks short this morning as we do want to see this resolution move forward, but there are a few things that I first want to share with the House. I appreciate the topic of the resolution being brought forward because it's important that we as legislators are talking about the safety and the well-being of Manitobans, and this resolution does, in part, talk about this.
Mr. Deputy Speaker, we need to be having that discussion because assault continues to go up and up here in the province of Manitoba. And this has only risen throughout the pandemic, and we know this predominately affects women and children, and Indigenous women and children. So it's critical we are debating this here inside the Manitoba Legislature.
With that said though, Mr. Deputy Speaker, I appreciated the way my colleague from Keewatinook put it, and in my own words, I sort of feel like it's passing the buck a little bit. This government often wants to blame the federal government, when the reality is, justice is not only a federal issue. We have a Justice Department here in the province of Manitoba, and our Province has a role to play.
And, you know, I can make reference to The Provincial Court Act and how every party in this House, the NDP party, the Liberal Party and the Conservative Party has brought forward the idea where judges should be taking part in sensitivity training. Because we know, right now, it can hinder healing in some ways; it can retraumatize folks in some ways.
We can talk about Clare's Law–and I'm excited; I'm going to a bill briefing in just about five minutes, Mr. Deputy Speaker, at 12 o'clock, here. This is–Clare's Law is a way that we can actually spot red flags and make sure that victims or potential victims are aware of their surroundings, and it's something that here, provincially, we have the ability to bring forward. So, again, we could be debating that right now this morning.
And the last thought I just want to share too–because I try to take every opportunity I can to talk about regulating therapy here in the House–and regulating therapy is completely a provincial jurisdiction decision, and this Province has the ability to regulate therapy, which would not only make it more affordable and accessible for Manitobans, who, in this case, perhaps, were victims of assault. They would be able to access therapeutic services, but it also ensures that who are providing the therapeutic services are competent, they are well trained, they are qualified to be helping people with their mental health needs.
So with those few words, I'm glad I did get the opportunity to speak. I know I don't have a lot of time if we want to see this legislation move forward. I appreciate the content of the legislation, but again, the government has to take more of a responsibility in justice here in the province of Manitoba.
MLA Malaya Marcelino (Notre Dame): Mr. Deputy Speaker, today's resolution brought forward by the member for Radisson (Mr. Teitsma) specifically refers to a Supreme Court of Canada decision based on Her Majesty the Queen V. David Sullivan, Matthew Winston Brown V. Her Majesty the Queen and Her Majesty the Queen V. Thomas Chan. These cases were heard together and dealt with three men who challenged section 33.1 of the Criminal Code on Charter grounds.
Now, former Mount Royal University student Matthew Brown was a central figure in one of these cases. He is from Calgary, and, while naked, he broke into the home of a university professor and attacked her, repeatedly smashing her hands with a broom handle. Mr. Deputy Speaker, he was charged in 2018 with break and enter, and aggravated assault, that left Janet Hamlett [phonetic] with broken bones in her hands.
* (11:50)
Brown's is one of three cases that the Supreme Court considered in the ruling. The court ruled that the defence of extreme intoxication to the point of automatism is available to those who choose to take intoxicants and then end up committing acts of violence. A partial definition of automatism is: a term describing unconscious involuntary behaviour.
In the Sullivan and Chan cases, the two men consumed drugs and then, in states of psychoses, stabbed family members. Sullivan injured his mother while Chan killed his father.
Now, section 33.1 in the Criminal Code is a complicated and controversial section of the Criminal Code. It prohibits the use of the defence of extreme intoxication in certain circumstances. The court struck down this section as unconstitutional.
If I were the member for Radisson, I'd listen to this speech, because he didn't even have some of these answers that I'm discussing right now in this–so it was–it's very important for those listening at home to even understand what the facts of these cases were. [interjection]
This was a unanimous decision–[interjection]
The Acting Speaker (Brad Michaleski): Order. Order. [interjection]
This is obviously a very sensitive issue, and I think we need to show respect for the people that have the floor.
MLA Marcelino: Again, this is a Supreme Court of Canada decision and it was a unanimous decision, and it read in part: The legitimate goals of protecting the victims–
The Acting Speaker (Brad Michaleski): Order. Time for the debate has expired.
When this matter is again before the House, the honourable member for Notre Dame will have eight minutes left.
This hour being 12 p.m., this House is recessed and stands recessed until 1:30 p.m.
LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA
Tuesday, May 31, 2022
CONTENTS